1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. 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.

Ironsights (in BF2)

Discussion in 'General Infiltration Discussion' started by Psychomorph, Jul 11, 2005.

  1. -=]N[=-ZeuS

    -=]N[=-ZeuS New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2004
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    0
    Maybe the bitmap rearsights are better for you, but wouldn't that remove from the smooth hip-to-aim motion of the current INF? From what I can remember, when you aim in BF2 the screen jumps to the sights rather than the gun lifting smoothly like in INF.

    Personally, I just don't like the 'hairs when hipped and the lack of weapon bob while stationary (and by god, you need to unload a clip of anything to kill anyone... and good luck getting a headshot!)

    Apart from that, the BF2 system isn't all that bad, almost reminds me of INF ('cept all the morons in BF2 just run out and get shot like lemmings and it's all about vehicles vehicles vehicles, god forbid you walk a few feet)

    If INF could look like that and run that smoothly, I would play it (I'm not buying BF2 yet, just messin' around with the demo)
     
  2. 5eleven

    5eleven I don't give a f**k, call the Chaplain

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2003
    Messages:
    787
    Likes Received:
    0
    I can't play BF2 at the moment because of the system requirements, however, based upon the pictures that I've seen attached, solely for the realism of the sight picture, I would have to say that it more closely resembles a true sight picture than the current implementation of Infiltration.

    This is not at ALL to say that I'm incredibly displeased with Infiltration's implementation, or that I like crosshairs or no weapon bob...........not at all. I'm just saying that it appears as though BF2's sight picture is more accurate.

    Normally, I would agree with Yurch, and I still do in some respects, but differ in others.

    If you are using sight shooting, for engaging middle to long range targets, your focus must be on the front sight post, and your eye should naturally center that post on either the rear aperature, or "center" in the diopter. This naturally means that everything rearward of your focus, and everything in the distance, is generally not focused, and will be slightly "fuzzy".

    And although this can be accomplished using both eyes, assuming that you have determined which "eye dominant" you are, generally RL shooters will close the non-dominant eye. Again, this now limits your vision to your shooting eye.

    Close quarters, or closer encounters should still be lined up properly, your focus will be on your target, both eyes open. The weapon should be an extension of your arms. Point shooting.

    The fact that you can see different aspects of your weapon, such as a forward assist, the receiver meeting the stock, the terrain below your feet, doesn't mean that you should. If you are shouldering a weapon and moving, your focus should generally be toward anticipated threats, and move generally with the weapon sights. If you did look "down" at either terrain or other portions of the weapon rearward of the rear aperature, you should be relying on peripheral vision, which as we all know, is not crystal clear.

    The difficulty in weapon implementation in game, is the same, generally, as Beppo described.........and,
    With the exception of the natural eye focus issues that I described before, this is very true.

    Sorry, and not to knock all the great work, but I've said before that weapon use in Infiltration is like placing the stock dead center against your chin. I do a lot of shooting in real life, and although the detail looks good, and it's fun ingame, it does not represent a real life shooting experience. Pistols in Infiltration are closer.........................but
     
  3. yurch

    yurch Swinging the clue-by-four

    Joined:
    May 21, 2001
    Messages:
    5,781
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was shooting(har!) more for the idea that I felt the sight was too close, not that I was missing detail. Regardless of that, having the sight block so much view becomes extremely problematic for close range shooting, especially with the lack of control over the view. For distance shooting I doubt anyone gives a damn which visual implementation is used, may as well go for the 'nicer' one.
     
  4. Derelan

    Derelan Tracer Bullet

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    2,630
    Likes Received:
    0
    Psychomorph, every time you make a post with more than 500 characters in it, I drink.
     
  5. 5eleven

    5eleven I don't give a f**k, call the Chaplain

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2003
    Messages:
    787
    Likes Received:
    0
    hmmmmm. Well, as I said earlier, and now that you mention it, I can understand it being problematic in point shooting, when both eyes are (should) be open. But again, at first glance and without having played the game, closer to the rear aperature, and focus on the front sight post make sense to me.

    I don't have a problem for gameplay going with the nicer one, my only argument is that the "nicer" one is not, specifically, more realistic, that's all.

    Basing on what Zeus said -
    and
    then this aspect of Infiltration is clearly better, and would be better in BF2 if implemented properly.

    Let's face it. In real life, with a weapon at port arms, or at low ready, it takes a second to properly bring it up, focus on your target, and prepare to fire properly. Not from "hipped to zeroed in a millisecond" as this appears.

    *EDIT* you talking about me, Derelan? LMFAO
     
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2005
  6. Psychomorph

    Psychomorph  

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,267
    Likes Received:
    2
    No. First of all if a gun is hipped, a weapon lifting animation before it jumps into the sights, like in all games should be possible. If it is not possible, than it sucks.

    BF2 did it not very good at all, but the jump to the sight is somewhat real life. In RL, when you aim for example a shouldered weapon, it is allready in the right palce, you just need to lower the head a bit and lift the weapon (shoulder). That would explain the very short animation.
    But to aim you close the left eye, which optically looks, like the sight jumps into your view.
    BF2 did it clumsy, but AA:O has it not bad, even if it can be done faster in RL than in AA:O.


    @5eleven:
    I kinda dislike the INF aiming too, but honestly thats far from true. It needs to be fixed nothing more.

    Generally I like the aiming with the freeaim INF does, but it always feels to me like the way you would use a binocular (both eyes opened) aimed weapon (with the ability to lower the sight). Because a single eye aimed weapon needs stabilisation and wouldn't be swayed around like in INF.

    Thats where my 'binocular/monocular suggestion' aims at.
    - To fuse the right things other games have, like bigger sights when aiming and generally a closer (bigger) weapon, with rifles beeing at the shoulder (30% features of the classical system).
    - Plus what INF has. Means freeaim and the aimed mode with the larger freeaim, which have to be optically changed to be really binocular (70% of features from INF).

    As said, I don't want to drop the current INF aim, to use the bigger sights instead. The INF aim has to live further in form of a flexible binocular aim, something other games do not have... and wont have so fast, so SS plz be the first to kick their ass.

    Thats exactly true. I´ve noticed something aiming a sight. That the peripheral views is not limitted by (dunno how called exactly) the lowest, highest and sideward 'face bones' (hope you got what I mean), but the eyes themself, so if you look forward, you can extend the peripheral view downward by looking down, without to move the head.
    That allows you to see many parts of the weapon keeping the head still, hell you even can see the elbow of your right arm, but that doesn't mean you see them always. When you aim, the peripheral view renders many weapon parts out, you are aware of them, but can't clearly see them, that would be the not visible parts on the screen in a game.
    INF shows to much (weapon to small).

    You could use the screen turn to simulate the view extension by beeing able to move the view lower (or higher...) while the weapon is fixed, but that would also give the intention of headmovement.


    @Buttstock placed dead center against the chin:
    It is not feasable otherwise in the game, BUT something that always gave me that impression is, that when you move, the waepon bobs to both sides the same way, which is wrong I think. It have had to bob to the right more and slightly to the left, that would create a right shoulder held impression.


    And yes, the pistols are the most real things in INF, at least they were in 2.86, as the pistols weren't that close to the screen. :con: :looks strangely at SS:
     
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2005
  7. yurch

    yurch Swinging the clue-by-four

    Joined:
    May 21, 2001
    Messages:
    5,781
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah, I think I'm going to start doing this too.
     
  8. Psychomorph

    Psychomorph  

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,267
    Likes Received:
    2
    When I have to answer on more than one post, that is written not just by a few words, I can hardly reply with just few words.

    @Derelan:
    Plz stop playing INF drunken, it sucked yesterday.
     
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2005
  9. ~viper~

    ~viper~ lo

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    but then you'll spend too much time writing, and not enough time playing (or drinking, in the case of some people :) )
     
  10. Psychomorph

    Psychomorph  

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,267
    Likes Received:
    2
    I want to spend my time playing INF:Source. That's what I really want.
     
  11. Lethal Dosage

    Lethal Dosage Serial Rapis...uh, Thread Killer

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2004
    Messages:
    608
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey Derelan, you must be getting pretty much wasted by now?

    Since all has been said about the BF2 iron sights that can be said... i'll say this.

    EA Games has finally released the v1.02 patch for BF2, just as well there was a few bugs that needed fixing, both with the game, and the first patch.

    I just wish that each team had different weaons to unlock, ATM all teams share the same unlockable weapons, cus like how many Chinese or Iraqi soldiers would be running around a G36c? That and i wish that the choppers were easier to fly, like the Battlefield: Vietnam choppers, but then i guess thats what stops ever BF2 player from flying choppers.
     
  12. Psychomorph

    Psychomorph  

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,267
    Likes Received:
    2
    I´m so hungry on screens. I die, do you SS don't care??? :p
     
  13. Beppo

    Beppo Infiltration Lead-Programmer

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 1999
    Messages:
    2,284
    Likes Received:
    1
    Waiting for the BF2-ModKit or whatever they will call it... hopefully out during the next weeks...

    to the choppers... funny thing is that they are easier to fly online than offline (in BF:V it was the other way around). If your connection wasn't superb in BF:V then flying a chopper was a bit 'touchy'. Now in BF2 it is exactly the other way around. Sure, if your connection sucks big time, then you end up crashing into anything around ya but normally flying a chopper is pretty easy online in BF2. Offline the chopper reacts almost too fast to your mouse/joystick movements and you need to tone down the sensitivity for'em a lot compared to online play.
    Anyway choppers in BF2 are cheese to fly, really.
    DC choppers were way harder to fly due to them not automatically resetting the pedals/rudder for controlling the back rotor once you released the keys and no real indicator on screen on how the pedals are currently 'pushed'. I guess a real chopper supports the pilot in this area like the gas and brake pedals in your car are automatically reset into a 'zero' position once you release them. So, I prefer the BF2 over the DC setup.

    @Psychomorph... nice pic. The binocular view is a nice thing that we talked about earlier already using another name for it I guess - if any. You can actually simulate it without having a real weapon in hands and then your pic comes close to the real thing. I guess that the transparent image and the opaque one would be closer together but your pic comes pretty close.
    To simulate it... stretch out your left arm holding your thumb up to simulate the front pin. Then hold up your right thumb close in front of your right eye (you can even rest it next to your nose). Now aim over your right and left thumbs on a spot on a wall or on an object some meters away from you with your left eye closed. Now open up your left eye and keep your focus on the spot or object in the distance. You will see an image close to what Psychomorph posted and the transparent part on the left will still aim on the spot or object correctly. You can even change your aim on another spot with both eyes open using the transparent picture and once you close your left eye you aim perfectly again. How transparent the left picture part will look is fully controllable by yourself. You can let it look almost invisible to almost opaque. Same for the right more opaque picture part. You can get your brain to make it almost invisible. Try it out and you will see for yourself. So how the picture should look like in game really depends on how 'trained' our soldier should be with this view ;)
     
  14. Crowze

    Crowze Bird Brain

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2002
    Messages:
    3,556
    Likes Received:
    1
    Nice example... although you should be focussing on the front sight, not the target. Bad Beppo! :p Of course, the problem there is the game then has to make the rest of the scene look out of focus, which is kind of tricky.
     
  15. Psychomorph

    Psychomorph  

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,267
    Likes Received:
    2
    @Beppo:
    Thx very much. The opaque weapon model could be more centered (which would make it closer as you say). I would have had made the pics different, but I had to take what AA:O gave me. The rearsight in the pic would be a bit higher and slightly more centered.
    As a developer you can set the weapon position perfectly, which is cool.


    To simulate it even better you can take something like a stick, or a rolled paper and hold it with the left and right hands and still alighn the thumbs as you described. Open both eyes you can clearly see the stick at the right side and your thumbs, while the aimed eye sees the second frontthumb, the rearthumb is very transparent, blurry and only little is noticeable about it (if aiming to the front, not looking at it [looking at it would create a weapon model at the right only thing ]).

    Strange thing is, that the left eye sees the opaque stick at the very right, but looking with both eyes this object appears pretty centered (strange kinda). Therefore in the game it have to be pretty centered, that creates a very dynamic feel of the weapon (especialyl when using freeaim).
    Also the shouldered position should be at a good degree centered, weapon use will benefit.


    If you open my pdf document and scroll down to page 3 you see an AK sight and G36K sight with the same feature. Of course the position of the right weapon model should be better.
     
  16. Beppo

    Beppo Infiltration Lead-Programmer

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 1999
    Messages:
    2,284
    Likes Received:
    1
    Maybe I wasn't clear enough ;)
    At the time you open your left eye and so looking over the sights with both eyes opened, you normally want to see what is in front of you and so you focus on the 'background' and no longer on the front pin of your iron sights. In the case of clearing a room for example you concentrate on the room, the furniture, doorways and stuff alike and so your focus isn't on the weapons front pin anymore. That's why I said you should focus on the spot on the wall or on the object once you opened up both eyes. :)
     
  17. Derelan

    Derelan Tracer Bullet

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Messages:
    2,630
    Likes Received:
    0
    Aw, I liked the idea of INF on the HL2 engine. HL2 looks so much nicer on my computer than BF2, and it doesnt have that stupid fog of war.
     
  18. Turin_Turambar

    Turin_Turambar Pls don´t shoot to the Asha´man

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2002
    Messages:
    339
    Likes Received:
    0

    average map size in BF2 > average map size in HL2

    :rolleyes:


    But yeah, the problem with BF2 is his perfomance vs graphic quality, which is a bit low.
     
  19. Psychomorph

    Psychomorph  

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,267
    Likes Received:
    2
    I´m more into Infantry middle to close range fighting and INF:Source would kick ass.
    Sadly I can play BF2 only on the lowest settings, even if the demos map is not the biggest BF2 map.

    I don't know, what to think about BF2's engine. It looks impressive:
    1
    2 (I love this muzzleflash)
    3 (note the smoke from the bullet chamber)
    4
    5
    6
    7 (lol)
    8 (Awesome!)

    EA screens

    Sum russian site
    Sum russian site


    But who the hell can play it on that settings?



    I think no matter if both eyes, or just one eye opened, you focus on the distance (on the target).

    Single eye aimed the frontpin appears massive as the rearsight.
    Both eyes aimed even the frontpin appears slightly 'transparent', but still less transparent than the rearsight, cuz the closer the object is to one eye, the more 'transparent' it appears.
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2005
  20. Psychomorph

    Psychomorph  

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,267
    Likes Received:
    2
    Mira.

    Picture one:
    Represents the monocular aiming. The rearsight and rearpart of the M4A1 is a blurry bitmap (source AA:O). The hand and the frontsight are meant to be 3D.
    Notice that you have enought view inside the diopter and also enough view at the flanks.
    I think this size of a sight is perfect (could be slightly smaller, but just only few units).

    Picture two & three:
    Represents the binocular aiming. Size keeps and freeaim keeps beeing standart (as highready [shouldered]), which allows you to still aim the weapon binocular (for fast aiming) and lower the sight to gain a clear view at the front (which is what we are used to do in INF, it just looks slightly different and is overall more effective).

    Picture four:
    The comparison between the sights of Infiltration (INF), Americas Army (AA:O) and my version/suggestion.

    Picture five:
    When looking at the light source having no light behind you, the rearsight and the 3D obejects are getting darker (if possible to make).


    I don't know if this kind of bitmap proximity/size will cause clipping errors, I hope it is not such a big issue.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Aug 2, 2005

Share This Page