adjustments to sights?

  • 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.

Dr.J

Staying Alive.
Nov 25, 2001
444
0
16
Hong Kong
www.alkdjflakdjfksj.com
i know this has been suggested 100000 times before, but is there any chance of inf after 2.9 having iron sights closer to the eye (apart from pistols obviously) ..... i know the current system gives you more peripherial vision but as a consequence the apertures of the peephole sights (M16A2, FA-MAS, etc) have been made so big they would kinda fail their purpose in real life.... i think that Americas Army distance is good... the sight should cover almost all of the screen....

also, with other weapons that have peephole sights (MP5, SG551) that have had part of their sights chopped off, do you think that itd be better to have the actual hole if they make the weapon closer to the eye??
 

keihaswarrior

New Member
Jan 7, 2003
1,376
0
0
41
Seattle
keihaswarrior.home.icq
OICW said:
They can't bring the sights to the correct distance with the UT engine, due to a clipping issue...wait for Inf on UT2003
Not true at all. Just look at ra286. In that mod the sights can be much closer to the player. It would be cool to have them that close w/o the zoom in rav2.

Re the sights on most of the weapons. It is hard to model the sights correctly in UT so the INF team fudged them considerably. We will have to wait for INF 3.0 for proper sights though :(
 

OICW

Reason & Logic > Religion
Since I've never seen RA286 in action, could someone post a screenshot?

Anyway, I was merely stating what the Inf team has said on many occasions before...the weapons aren't at their usual RL eye relief positions due to the clipping with the UT engine.
 

Dr.J

Staying Alive.
Nov 25, 2001
444
0
16
Hong Kong
www.alkdjflakdjfksj.com
yeah i know what you mean..... in vanilla 2.86 you can see your fingers and stuff throught the weapon when you lift the weapon to the free aim limit.... but ra really fixed that ;) ...... still waiting for cooler sights in 3.0!
 

yurch

Swinging the clue-by-four
May 21, 2001
5,781
0
0
USA, Maryland.
Visit site
Dr.J said:
i know this has been suggested 100000 times before, but is there any chance of inf after 2.9 having iron sights closer to the eye (apart from pistols obviously) ..... i know the current system gives you more peripherial vision but as a consequence the apertures of the peephole sights (M16A2, FA-MAS, etc) have been made so big they would kinda fail their purpose in real life.... i think that Americas Army distance is good... the sight should cover almost all of the screen....
Uhh, you realize that bringing them closer will make the aperatures bigger?

keihaswarrior said:
Not true at all. Just look at ra286. In that mod the sights can be much closer to the player. It would be cool to have them that close w/o the zoom in rav2.
The zoom IS what makes the sights bigger.


Making the sights bigger does not make them more accurate, more efficient, or easier to use. Shooting a target using a post that's four times as large in visual scale isn't a good scenerio, and having the sights to my eye in the game should not block 70% of my viewing area. Think FAMAS times four. If that is what you people want the irons to become, I'm just going to use a scope.

I don't get these constant suggestions of making the sights bigger. I can see down to the forward assist of an M16 if I'm looking through the sight. Yeah, it 'looks' bigger in real life, but so does everything else, including the target. That's also why the zoom thing works like it should.
If a 200m standing person IRL is the same height as the FSP, it's pretty rediculous that people would want the sights to dwarf 100m people in inf. So no, it's not even realistic.
 

OICW

Reason & Logic > Religion
Hmmm, would that mean that in the future, when there's Inf on UT2003 with corrrectly modelled sights at their usual RL eye relief positions, you'd still want the zoom to keep the perspectives right yurch?

Sorry, I've exhausted my very limited knowledge about FOV and the positioning of models to the screen.
 

Dr.J

Staying Alive.
Nov 25, 2001
444
0
16
Hong Kong
www.alkdjflakdjfksj.com
yurch, i meant in proportion to the rifle the size of the hole is huge... but yeah, i get what you mean. so i think that yurch has solved my dilemma once and for all ;)

EDIT: but would the sights need to be closer if we wanted to fix the sights for things like MP5 and SG551?
 
Last edited: