A different aiming system

  • Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
Apr 21, 2003
2,274
2
38
Europe
The only one ironsight pic of the FAMAS I found in the net sometime ago.

As allready said, I find the FAMAS and G36K sights in INF gold right. The other weapons have to small sights, that cause a discripancy. Not the biggest problem, but still there.
Look the pic I attached, imagine the M16A2 sights (which is in real life a bit smaller than the FAMAS) adapted to the FAMAS sight.
 

Attachments

  • famas3.jpg
    famas3.jpg
    77.2 KB · Views: 70
Last edited:

chuckus

Can't stop the bum rush.
Sep 23, 2001
771
0
16
Visit site
the g36 cqb debate can be solved by releasing that sweet g36c model you guys have locked away somewhere :D :D :D

there's a reason they gave the carbine variant just irons ;)
 

yurch

Swinging the clue-by-four
May 21, 2001
5,781
0
0
USA, Maryland.
Visit site
Beppo said:
I guess I'm not the only one here that can use a FA MAS effectively even in CQB...
Okay, so maybe there's a grand total of two people who claim they can use it.

As said, the Aimpoint of the G36 would work effectively even with both eyes opened. But the angle of the weapon would be a key factor here too cause it can lead to the image the left eye is seeing covering the aimpoint effectively for you. As said, you see two images, both blurry with the left eye seeing a blurry dark weapon sheme and the right eye still looking thru the aimpoint device. Your focus then determines what part you can see effectively. The red 'glowing' aimpoint would help but still it would never look like a single G36K made semi-transparent.
The FA MAS, again, is another story cause it has no aimpoint at all. You would be able to play with your eyes focus to still see the iron sights somehow aligned but the big parts around would block your view at least a bit.
We all know it's impossible to even do a proper single-eye view of irons, let alone a binocular view on a monocular viewpoint device.
There's only one real question you need to ask though.

Can you see more with a two-eye setup in real life than with the current setup in game?

If the answer is yes, it means the idea is not totally without merit, and I wish it wouldn't get dismissed so easily. With a simple total transparency setup as don describes, you are showing 'too much', that's correct. But when faced with the choice of showing too much or too little, I like to give the player the benefit of the doubt when I consider how clunky rifle contol can be in some situations.
 
Apr 21, 2003
2,274
2
38
Europe
I know the answer, stick to crosshairs :p j/king.

I have no problems with using FAMAS sights, the only thing is, I am always better using M16 sights. They is to much size discripancy to have both sights usable the same way. M16 and SIG551 will be always better in INF2.9, no matter how good you can handle the FAMAS sight (except you are an excellent hipshooter, or a hardcore trained FAMAS user).
 

Beppo

Infiltration Lead-Programmer
Jul 29, 1999
2,290
5
38
52
Aachen, Germany
infiltration.sentrystudios.net
I'm not dismissing the idea of a transparent weapon model that easily. I simply don't think that the 'easy' semi-transparent way is one that would look good or even realistic. A blury sheme like some games out there try already would maybe be the correct thing.
Well if anybody out there can take me a day to a shooting range letting me handle some rifles first hand to 'refresh' my memories .... just call. :p
I never trained looking thru an aiming device with both eyes opened or the left eye uncovered. And I do not own a rifle to test this out. So all I can do is testing with other 'equipment' and then imagining what a real FA MAS would look like in this situation for example.


To the FA MAS...
it also depends on what area you are aiming at. If your job is to cover a road, a doorway or whatever and your distance is far enough so that the whole area you have to cover fits into the viewable area of the screen while you aim the FA MAS then you will have no real disadvantage over something like the M16. It all depends on the situation and for what you use the weapon. And so every weapon has its pros and cons in any situation. But you guys know that already...
 
Last edited:

gal-z

New Member
May 20, 2003
420
0
0
Ramat-Hasharon, Israel
Visit site
Head turning - doean't have much to do with what we discussed already, but anyway, if it's put in the game, it should be only while holding a key for it, and when the key is released your view jumps back to normal.

Freeaim - I think it's a possible idea to seperate head, weapon and body movement, at least in aimed mode - like beppo said, you wouldn't move your body if you follow a target until it moves too far, but when you follow it with your rifle, your head follows as well. That means you need to make the head+weapon turn while keeping the body at the same place.

2-eye open with reflex sights - the whole point of those sights is easy to use with 2 eyes open, which lets you see more than you'd see with 1 eye open. Doing the blending of 2 images seen from both eyes, if possible, is good and important to make.
2-eye open with irons - it's kinda different from reflex. It's very hard to focus on the irons with 2 eyes open. The small percent of soldiers who are trained to do so are probably trained to pretty much ignore what their left eye sees, so I doubt they enjoy much of the wider FOV advantage (they enjoy other physical advantages which can't really be put and won't matter in a game). If it IS made, the right eye picture should be quite a lot "stronger" than the left eye picture, unlike reflex sights, which should have both eyes equal, or close to equal.

I'd also write my suggestion in a form of pseudo-code for how I think the hipped/lowready/shouldered/aimed transition should be:
"start timer" = start counting miliseconds and put the value in the variant "timer". Sets timer=0.
"stop timer" freezes the value that's in the variant timer.
x is the number of miliseconds it would take to aim the weapon from the current position.
y is the time defined to differ between a "hold breath" and a "stop aiming". Value already exists in the game now. I suppose it's about 250ms?
Code:
When lowready:
   OnAltfireDown
      start timer
   OnAltfireUp
      stop timer
      if timer<x then WeaponPosition=shouldered
      else weaponposition=aimed
When shouldered:
   OnAltfireDown
      start timer
   OnAltfireUp
      stop timer
      if timer<x then WeaponPosition=lowready
      else weaponposition=x
When aimed:
   OnAltfireDown
      start timer
      hold breath
   OnAltfireUp
      stop timer
      breath again
      if timer<y then WeaponPosition=shouldered
When hipped:
   {same code as lowready}
   Note: To hip your weapon at any given time click a new "hip weapon"
   button. I can't see any better idea. Possibly make it a toggle that'll
   alternate between lowready and hipped. Of course x should be increased
   accordingly.
I hope someone can make a little application that'll show what my pseudo-code means, or simply try this control system when a mutie using these firing modes is made. Do not forget the shouldered (and to some degree lowready) mode is the heart of this thread.
 

Beppo

Infiltration Lead-Programmer
Jul 29, 1999
2,290
5
38
52
Aachen, Germany
infiltration.sentrystudios.net
for the free head turning...
the 'snap back' as said would not be the thing that you would ever see in RL and it would not help you at all in a game. A freelook feature would need to snap the weapon back from whatever position you 'left' it in to your current viewposition (that's what not many if any freelook modes do out there). A snap back to your weapon position is more or less useless.
Same example as last time... you look up left at a door on ie an upper floor in the freelook mode, your weapon still pointing ie straight forward from your body and only your head and eyes turn up left. Then you exit the freelook mode by a key/button press or by releasing a key/button and your player model will raise the weapon to your current view and if needed the body will rotate to that location then too. So your focus stays on the door the whole time and is not snapping back to your bodies real rotation.
 
Apr 21, 2003
2,274
2
38
Europe
Beppo, I am not sure if your reply is directed at me, but thats how I suggested it. I mean that if you want to return to the exactly direction like your weapon (your previous looking direction), you have to manually look to that direction.
But I am not sure whats the best for the prone position. Since crawling is slow it is probably better to have an automatical snap in into the previous position.
But on the other hand, it could be better the opposite, to have an crawling into the looking direction feature. You could observe in a fast speed and correct your position if needed by releasing this key.
I think I prefer the second.
 

Beppo

Infiltration Lead-Programmer
Jul 29, 1999
2,290
5
38
52
Aachen, Germany
infiltration.sentrystudios.net
@Psychomorph...
gal-z said:
Head turning - doean't have much to do with what we discussed already, but anyway, if it's put in the game, it should be only while holding a key for it, and when the key is released your view jumps back to normal...
That's why I replied and said that it should not 'jump back to normal' ;)
 

jayhova

Don't hate me because I'm pretty
Feb 19, 2002
335
0
16
58
Houston Texas
www.flex.net
Beppo said:
that's how I see it too. But a key for getting the weapon into that position would be ok too. So you can put down the weapon by moving it into a specific position for a specific amount of time or by hitting a special key for example. So a freelook key would be able to do this easily too if needed.

I suppose that's ok as long as I have the option of just lowering my weapon. I like the option of as few buttons as possible. Of course it would be nice to be able to define what the wait time is etc.
 

NavySupra

New Member
Oct 21, 2004
41
0
0
I think there are some other options that havn't really been brought up or looked at. Though past the 3rd page I just started skimming.

In regards to the FAMAS: I put the rifle into "aimed" then lower it. Jerking the moust up quickly brings the site picture onto my target. for the most part I have my firearm, whichever it is, allready aimed but lowered. In a way this is the high-ready position. This allows me to have the upper 3/4 of the screen fully viewable, and to be able to quickly bring my target to bare.

In regards to a "low-ready" for the most part special forces allready has the butt of the firearm "locked" into ones shoulder, though the firearm is pointed down and out of site. In this fashion it is easy to quickly bring the rifle/smg to bare. Having a rifle/smg(from now on refered to as long-gun) in a "hipped position" would take more time to get ready to fire. The time it would take to raise and get the butt seated correctly then to aim, could cost you your life.

In this case I do not agree with adding a seperate "high-ready" Why? Because its not realistic to have to click, or press a button to bring your long-gun fully to bare. By doing it manually yourself is far more accurate.

Also, its human nature to have only the site eye open. I don't know how many of you have gone shooting, but for all the time I spent up at the range with various rifles and handguns one thing I noticed is that I always closed my left eye. If I left it open the site picture would be obsured and my shots would be off target.

An interesting thing to note about handguns that is probibly outside of the games capabitlity. Handguns CAN be easily aimed with both eyes open. having your sites painted brightly, allows your brain to quickly assimulate their position and considering that it is held far enough away from you it doesn't mess up the site picture either. It is not the most accurate, but it will definatly allow you to hit a body mass at 50yards.

Unfortunantly I have no experence with the m16/m4 family of rifles, but my experence comes from some of the oldest iron sites in the book, and I can it my targets accuratly everytime.

Winchester .22LR pump-action (late 1800's)
Winchester .32 Special Lever Action (late 1800's)
Winchester .45-70 Lever Action (late 1800's)
Axe .36-06 bolt action iron sights (1980's)
8mm sniperrifle scoped (wwii, grandfather picked it up while over seas, Chekc or something)
Walther ppk .32 (wwii)
Beretta 92fs 9mm Inox
Colt 1911 clone .45acp
 

keihaswarrior

New Member
Jan 7, 2003
1,376
0
0
41
Seattle
keihaswarrior.home.icq
I think that developement of a two eye open aiming method in INF is very worth it. Not only for reflex and aimpoint sights, but I would also like to add that all of the ACOG scopes that INF has as attachments are ment to be used with both eyes open. If you want, go to http://www.trijicon-inc.com and read about the "Bindon Aiming Concept (BAC)." It tells you all about it on their website and even has a little flashmovie.
 

gal-z

New Member
May 20, 2003
420
0
0
Ramat-Hasharon, Israel
Visit site
I dunno... For me and basically almost everybody I know it's hard to aim with a magnifying sight or ironsight with both eyes open. Only reflex sights (not magnifying) really have that advantage of being extremely easy to use with both eyes open.
What they talk about refers to red-dot acog sights, and imo, is still too hard to use for it to be a good idea to keep your weapon in front of your eye rahter than the already-well-known "shouldered" position.
 

Arethusa

We will not walk in fear.
Jan 15, 2004
1,081
0
0
I admit I've only occasionally skimmed this thread since it got to be more than a couple pages long (and big images are mean to Mr. 56k), but how viable are shutter goggles? I don't really mean for Infiltration, as a mod just doesn't have the commercial power to back a new technology, but in broad terms of future viability, are there technologies that could, at least in part, sidestep the problem without simply being faddish vapor hardware?
 

keihaswarrior

New Member
Jan 7, 2003
1,376
0
0
41
Seattle
keihaswarrior.home.icq
gal-z said:
I dunno... For me and basically almost everybody I know it's hard to aim with a magnifying sight or ironsight with both eyes open. Only reflex sights (not magnifying) really have that advantage of being extremely easy to use with both eyes open.
What they talk about refers to red-dot acog sights, and imo, is still too hard to use for it to be a good idea to keep your weapon in front of your eye rahter than the already-well-known "shouldered" position.
I agree with you about trying to use most scopes with both eyes open. It gives me kind of a headache to do it although it can be done. But, have you used Trijicon ACOG's much? They are supposed to be specially designed for two eye open aiming, especially the ones with triangle, dot, or chevron aiming reticules in place of dark crosshairs.
 

gal-z

New Member
May 20, 2003
420
0
0
Ramat-Hasharon, Israel
Visit site
I had a trijicon acog for a very long time (like 9 months) but with a crosshair, not a dot. I will try to grab one with a dot and try it with 2 eyes open to see how useful it is. However, I do know many people who have this comment that it's a lot harder to aim accurately at long distance with the red dot than the crosshair (since the dot covers the target), although still possible.