Ironsights (in BF2)

I played the BF2 demo, wasn't that amased, but the ironsights really made it.
It has a frontsight (and bodypart) as 3D objects and the rearsight is a light affected (!) bitmap.

I personally think that would be an awesome thing for INF.
Of course it depends on how the sights are implemented in the next INF. When they is that huge freeaim when aiming and small weapons, than it is not possible to implement rearsight bitmaps, but when it has the more true to life aiming with the rearsights close to the eye/screen, with just a tinny bit of freeaim, than this ironsight system would be awesome.

Especially the red dot sights got my attention. Also the glowing dot (not just a red point) is what I have allready talked about on this forums, just awesome.

When you look down, the sight gets brighter and looking up to the light source makes the rearsight darker.


Of course the sights are not all correct in BF2, the rearsight is way to close to the eye making the aperture to huge to alight the frontsight, also the apertures of the M16 and M249 are, as always, wrong (huge), but all those errors can be made right in INF.

Also the ironsights in BF2 are too big, can be made better in INF too.



I play BF2 offline just to use the sights and it feels so good. When you move, the sights are bobbing very natural and all gives you the feel of using a real weapon.
Who said bitmaps are such bad?... At least what BF2 got is much better than huge polygonal and sharp edged 3D rearsights.

I´m for having this in the next INF, what you think?


I don't know how they made the bitmap rearsights, but I allready posted ideas in the past, that the rearsight can be actually a 3D plate, fully transparent and the bitmap is just a texture which is affected by light that way.
The frontsight and the visible upper weapon parts are normal 3D objects (they have to be).

The attached pic explaines it.

When they clip the 3D weapon model (you mean the one that is at the right side usually?), what is about the 3D rearsight? Or do they place the camera slightly over the 3D rearsight, so the bitmap has free space?
I ask this due to the old case I have spoken about some time ago, where the aperture of the 3D M16 sight is realistically small, while the bitmap have to have a larger aperture (due to proximity). so you couldn't place the bitmap over the 3D rearsight if you would like to make it realistic/right/correct/good.

The slight freaim you speak about that can affect the bitmap is exactly what I thought about too.

By the way, how does it work that the bitmap is affected by light? In BF2 it seems to me as a simple system, where looking up the bitmap gets darker and looking down it gets brighter. This system still creates a better illusion than a 3D rearsight, but is they more possible, to make it (the illusion) even more intensive? That would be awesome.


Finally the issue is how to get very nice and correct rearsight bitmaps, that can't be just photoshop miracles, but photos of the real weapons. But I think you have people, or know people (+ the community) that own weapons, or know how to get access to them. Cuz such a system needs high quality and real photos.

Anyway, I hope you can/will make it, cuz this will be the most intensive way and the best illusion to simulate sight aiming.
The only problem I have with bitmaps, is, that the sight fills out the whole screen, while I personally think the rearsights (M16 for example) have to be not that huge as in BF2, or AA:O to simulate a better human fov when aiming. Therefore the rearsight bitmaps need to show more of the weapon backpart (that under the actual rearsight), but that won'T break the illusion if done right.


The next issue that I really dislike in both BF2 and AA:O are the AK sight, while in BF2 the bitmap is superb, the size is overkill.
Since the AK rearsight is much more at the front than other weapons, I would find it not to bad keeping the AK rearsight 3D, especially cuz it will be affected in movement by the freeaim much more than for example the M16 rearsight.
OR, you show more of the AK rear (upper) weapon parts (in the bitmap), then you need to make a 'blurryness fade in' in the bitmap, where the lower (closer) body part is more distorted, while the more distant AK rearsight is less distorted (but still a bit).


Sorry if I tell to much, but I have thought about all that, since the AK sights are a bit different than the typical 'close to eye rerarsights'. Pistols of course have to stay fully 3D.


As said, you have to make it, cuz such a system will kick ass.

Yeah, 'The Beppo' is back

Thx for info Beppo, where you got the pre demo video?

But slightly smaller sight if possible (or as possible) would be good. By the way, did you noticed how comfortable and good it is to use those (bigger) sights? This is comfort to me in comparison to INF.

yurch said:

What? Tell me again why having over half of my screen blocked is 'comfortable'?

Click to expand...

If you read my previous posts, you will notice, that the huge sights (aswell the wrong apertures) are my 'single' compliants about the BF2 sights.

I don't speak about BF2 like it has superb sights, I rather refer to what awesome things would be possible in INF, cuz SS wil make it 100%ly 100% better.

What I find about the BF2 sights so comfortable? That the frontpin actually has not just a width of a pixel and that you have a bit space inside the diopter aperture (as it meant to be), which is just comfort to aim with, in comparison to INF.

Same as the original 2.9 Famas sight is comfortable to aim with (speaking only about the sight aiming, not the whole handling which is problematic in comparison with other INF weapons).

cracwhore said:

I think the updated 2.9 FAMAS was a step in the right direction.

Click to expand...

Exactly my thought. I loved aiming the FAMAS with that bigger sights, and to be honest, the size of this sight was exactly how I would like it to be (means slightly smaller than BF2 sights, but still big enought to aim comfortly).
Of course (as was discussed before) the whole handling of this FAMAS, in comparison to other INF weapons, was problematic and didn't matched the system.
To use big sights, the system have to be different (shouldered, probably ability to aim binocular and so on). But that is allready known I think.

yurch said:

The semitransparency of the BF models is the only thing that makes them more 'comfortable' to me (and perhaps the longer engagement ranges), which I think is an excellent indication that we should be looking into two eye shooting abilities.

Click to expand...

Hmm, I play the demo on low settings, maybe thats why I didn't noticed any semitransparency? What semitransparency?

Just IMO, but just a semitransparent rearsight to simulate binocular aiming would be not very good.

yurch said:

Of course, none of this has anything to do with the fact that average gamer Psychomorph...

Click to expand...

What do you mean with that?

@yurch:
Ah you mean the blurryness, but that doesn't really create more view, but you see, that is one pro point for bitmaps kinda.
I don't mean all this is so perfect, but it is a seriously good option at all.

@Beppo:
Sad that you (devs) didn't used the bitmap system earlier, but ok.

Beppo said:

a mix of 3D model and HUD texture is the way to go imo, cause you will get the blur-effect, the correct distance to the back part of the sights and clipping of 3D models is no real problem anymore.

Click to expand...

Nice :tup:
Is it just your opinion, or something the team decided to go for? (If I´m not asking to much...)

Beppo, I don't know if you noticed, but some time ago I had a discussion, mostly with yurch, in the development forum and I came up with a 'weird' idea for binocular aiming and so. You could check it out if you want and have enough time, lol.
The attached pic is the short explanation, if you want, ignore the lowready thing, I primary refer to the binocular/monocular thing.
The thread explains why I suggest the 1st person binocular aim as it is in the picture. It really starts with post #37.

Turin_Turambar said:

Well Beppo, prove it with a Inf 3.0 screenshot!

Click to expand...

Agreed