-=N=-ZeuS said:
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.
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.
5eleven said:
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.
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.
:looks strangely at SS:
)
