Upvote
0
Free aim on iron sights needs to go
- Thread starter VariousNames
- Start date
you guys are talking about how the head moves and how you are always fixed in the ironsights to justify it being in the center, but all that is completely irrelevant you should be able to have some free aim in IS and as I explained before, you are not moving your head, you are not even moving your eyes, yet you are not seeing anything you shouldn't see.
Why this obsession with the center of the screen having to be the center of your eye focus?
In game your vision is confined to the window that is your monitor, seeing a bit more does not necessarily mean turning your head.
Free aim in IS gives more fluidity and naturality to the aiming system so it should stay
And adding another button for this, is stupid, just adding more keyboard dancing to it will only make it more ArmA and less RO
Why this obsession with the center of the screen having to be the center of your eye focus?
In game your vision is confined to the window that is your monitor, seeing a bit more does not necessarily mean turning your head.
Free aim in IS gives more fluidity and naturality to the aiming system so it should stay
And adding another button for this, is stupid, just adding more keyboard dancing to it will only make it more ArmA and less RO
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Yes, your cheek is glued to the cheek rest on the rifle, thus your head is immobile while looking down the sights...
I have no problem with aiming freely from the shoulder, but when looking down the sights your sights should be centered as a result of the fact that your face is glued to it. This is not to say that your aim should instantaneously be placed at the exact position it was when you pressed the ironsight button, and this is not to say that there should be no ability to maneuver the rifle from your face and aim freely from the shoulder WITHOUT AIMING DOWN THE SIGHTS (which implies that your face is set in the cheek guard with your eyes looking parallel down the sights, i.e. centered to the screen), it is just to say that if this is implemented it should be a matter of an alt-function mapped to a key on the keyboard similar to ARMA 2. Free aim should not be immediate whenever you sight by default as a result of the impact on control....making movement awkward and clumsy, fluid turning nearly impossible. It is also the case that it has an impact on realism for the aforementioned reason that when looking down the sights your face rests in the cheek guard and your eyes are parallel to the sights. Period.
Upvote
0
I believe that it should be toned down slightly, but not too much.
Anyway it would make more sense if you made head movement and rifle movement separate, except in iron sights.
Someone from TWI might want to clarify/justify why they put it in.
Anyway it would make more sense if you made head movement and rifle movement separate, except in iron sights.
Someone from TWI might want to clarify/justify why they put it in.
Upvote
0
It gives no fluidity, it makes your turning locked and makes your rifle fluid, making control difficult. Imagine trying to walk with slippery feet or with Jell-o legs.
The fact of the matter is if you want free aim it should be relegated to an alt-mode. ARMA 2 did it. Free aim from the shoulder is realistic, free aim when aiming down the sights is not.
At the very least the game needs an accurate modeling of the angle of the rifle from your line of sight....
Upvote
0
the last thing I want is RO playing like ArmA.. because BI have no idea about gameplay, any step in ArmA's direction is one point that RO loses
Last edited:
Upvote
0
It's funny that you say that because RO never had free aim before, that was an ARMA thing.
So I suppose on account of that fact you'll change your tune about free aim.
Upvote
0
All it does is allow you to aim around without moving the rest of your body.
Upvote
0
really?, since when?
ARMA also have weapons, just like RO, let make the new game without weapons
no, my point was about keyboard dancing and ****ty unintuitive systems of pressing a thousand buttons to do slight things that should be done naturally, and IS free aim in ArmA1 was one of the only few good things that game had, and it wasn't even as good as it was a bit more exaggerated that I would have liked it.
Upvote
0
Well I haven't played ARMA myself to know anything about it, but last I checked, hip shooting free aim has been in RO since the mod..... RO didn't have free aim in Iron Sights before, but free aim in general did exist for some time.
As a serpate post:
I finally hunted down the RO video of all the new features they're planning to have in the game..... while a few in here have their own various ideas of how the IS free aim should be, I saw what they were talking about in what they put in as their Free Aim.
I like being able to be sorta pinned to cover without being exposed, but exactly how do you stick to the wall and will it screw up your ability to run or dodge faster? The shooting around corners isn't too bad. Being able to shoot through certain objects seems neat.
But this free aim thing? Realistic?
Didn't seem realistic to me and just looked like more visual eye candy that served no purpose and is just one more thing to frig around with while you're actually trying to kill someone.
Throw on top of that the adjustible sights you now have to take into account..... the various breathing effects, etc. unless you have an SMG and at close range, as a new player, you're not going to get very far before you're killed.
And that little GPS on the bottom right screen showing your team and objectives? The Big Objective markers that you can turn on or off that block a good chunk of the screen? Weight control? big green names above your team mates even when you're not directly looking at them?
Bad Medicine.
This game is not appealing to me in the slightest and while there are some features that are neat, I think they're overkilling with the amount of crap you have to deal with in the game and many of the new features they put in to make the game more main stream, like the above eye candy, has just pretty well sealed its fate.
I think old school players are not going to be impressed with the new layout of the game and new players are going to find the game way over complicated and too many buttons and features to deal with to lose all enjoyment of the game.....
If there is a demo for this game, I would probably give it a go, it'd only be fair, but until I can determine how the game actually plays out and how bad these new features are, I won't spend a dime on it.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
for what its worth read xendance his signature.
i dont see the issue with adjustable sights as if you prefer to not use it you dont have to, as there is bulletdrop already on the rifles especially on the sniper its just annoying if your entire recticle blocks the enemy.
i dont see the issue with adjustable sights as if you prefer to not use it you dont have to, as there is bulletdrop already on the rifles especially on the sniper its just annoying if your entire recticle blocks the enemy.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
This is what I've been saying and is exactly why I am exhorting TWI to include options that server admins can use to "tweak" the game experience. While having specific "modes" will be a help to the novice admin, I still would like to see adjustable parameters within those modes. To make the game "fair" (for lack of a better term) and so that everyone on the server feels as though what they see/experience everyone else is seeing/experiencing, the server should be able to control some of what the player sees/experiences.
Upvote
0
As others put it, when in iron sights, your face "is glued" to the rifle. It shouldn't move.
The whole point of being in iron sights is to be as accurate as possible. Which means as little movement as possible.
If you want to move your rifle around with free aim, just take it out of iron sights.
But at the least, it should be an option in the menu. So all of us realism players can turn if off.
Otherwise it will just be something that makes aiming hard for no reason other than making the game be "more hardcore", or "different".
I don't want RO to become ArmA, where it is abnormally hard to do really simple tasks.
The whole point of being in iron sights is to be as accurate as possible. Which means as little movement as possible.
If you want to move your rifle around with free aim, just take it out of iron sights.
But at the least, it should be an option in the menu. So all of us realism players can turn if off.
Otherwise it will just be something that makes aiming hard for no reason other than making the game be "more hardcore", or "different".
I don't want RO to become ArmA, where it is abnormally hard to do really simple tasks.
Upvote
0
Anyone with a rifle can tell you that this just isn't true. There is a bit of space to move when aiming down the sights. Try it for yourself if you can.
I think the free aim in IS accurately depicts that movement.
Upvote
0
??? Say what ???
Unless they are instructing shooters differently in this decade than back in my day, if you don't have the butt of the rifle pressed firmly against your shoulder and your cheek resting firmly (but gently) against the cheek plate, you are not going to get any kind of a decent sight picture. Nor are you very likely to hit the broad side of a barn. Not to mention, you'll probably end up with bruised shoulder and a welp on your cheek. (And just for fun, if you have a scope, you might as well press your eye socket right up against the eye piece. That'll be fun, too.)
The skill in open sight marksmanship (precision) comes in reproducing the same positioning (muscle memory) every time you look down the sights in order to gain the exact same sight picture.... Otherwise you'll never get your rifle sighted in to produce any sort of accuracy. (note the differences between precision and accuracy).
Not addressed at anyone in particular, but some of the arguments here seriously have no basis from training or long term experience. I think much of the debate stems from not having a clear definition of what is meant by "free aim".
If "free aim" in iron sights means the gun wavering around the intended target while the sight picture remains good, then ROOST does it pretty well, imo.
If "free aim" in iron sights means that the front sight moves independantly of the back sight....<gah!> lets hope not. Not only would that be a programming nightmare (ie. where are the two sights relative to each other and where does the bullet go?); how would the player compensate? Move the mouse up rapidly, then back down quickly to counter-act the inertia?
If "free aim" in iron sights means that when brought to the shoulder the sight picture is perfect, but where the sights are targeted are variable...<meh> that might be do-able if they are not off very far (seconds of degrees). I think most would be amazed at how quickly and precisely one can learn to bring the weapon up to their shoulders and have a good sight picture and be on target. The variation would come from what position the shooter was in. For example, it would be a lot harder to get a good on target sight picture while crouched and quickly peeking around a corner than it would be to do the same while free standing.
So.....someone please define: free aim in iron sights
Floyd
Upvote
0
the thing is its multiple things in one. Its not just one thing.
As far as what TWI gave as explanation is to somewhat simulate that you can look slightly away from the sight picture so that the ironsight doesnt block the target.
Some people say whell if you aint looking directly down the sights it should be unaligned. The issue is the system doesnt know where you are looking, thats why the sights will always stay aligned as sometimes when you move your mouse down you want to actually aim more downward rather than look slightly above the target.
--------
For me the ideal game and multimonitor setup means that everything is sharp rather than just the whatever the center of my screen is looking at. As i can look around myself quicker by moving my own head and eyes, than moving my mouse and center of the screen around. Thats why i hate dept of field myself, unless it would be done with eye tracking.
For example in the movie avatar if you wear those 3d glasses you can only see the things sharp that the director wants you to look at. While especially when things get 3d i would like to look at say the background and see that sharp. And pick what i look at myself.
As far as what TWI gave as explanation is to somewhat simulate that you can look slightly away from the sight picture so that the ironsight doesnt block the target.
Some people say whell if you aint looking directly down the sights it should be unaligned. The issue is the system doesnt know where you are looking, thats why the sights will always stay aligned as sometimes when you move your mouse down you want to actually aim more downward rather than look slightly above the target.
--------
For me the ideal game and multimonitor setup means that everything is sharp rather than just the whatever the center of my screen is looking at. As i can look around myself quicker by moving my own head and eyes, than moving my mouse and center of the screen around. Thats why i hate dept of field myself, unless it would be done with eye tracking.
For example in the movie avatar if you wear those 3d glasses you can only see the things sharp that the director wants you to look at. While especially when things get 3d i would like to look at say the background and see that sharp. And pick what i look at myself.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I just tried it with a Vz.24 rifle and produced a similar motion as was depicted in the preview videos.
Yes you *should* have the weapon snug on your shoulder, but these practices don't account for moving targets and targets above or below the shooter. It is entirely possible to move if you take a little pressure off and shift a bit. All while keeping your sights lined up.
Such motion should be even easier with weapons like the MP40, which has its stock folded and out of the way.
Upvote
0
I'm sorry, Reise, but I just don't have a clue as to what you are saying. But from what I can gather, what you are describing would be poor gun handling mechanics on the part of the shooter. Should that be modeled in the game? and should competent and skilled shooters be forced to play that way?
Go shoot a round or two of sporting clays. Shotgun below your shoulder. When you yell "pull", you acquire the bird with your eyesight and track it. You bring the gun to your shoulder and cheek (almost simultaneously) as your eyes and torso follow the pigeon. With practice, the shotgun will be pointing exactly where you are looking when it reaches your cheek and shoulder. As you track the pigeon, the gun is on target as you swing through and pull the trigger.
Depending upon the station, one's upper torso may be swinging from left to right or down to up or any combination in between. Once the gun is raised, it is always pressed firmly against the shoulder and the cheek is always in contact with the stock. Same principle applies (except I promise you that a human isn't traveling as fast as that clay pigeon.
)
I can guarantee you that shooting a couple of rounds through a high powered rifle with it just off your shoulder will convince you to do otherwise. No one is saying you can't move or look around with the gun to your shoulder. You just generally just wouldn't do it with the weapon in shooting position. You may do it in a "ready" position, but then you're not looking down the sights (therefore not in "iron sights".) You'll have to bring the gun up and reacquire you're sight picture. That instance would require "free aim", yes. But that would be a whole 'nother set of animations.
Go shoot a round or two of sporting clays. Shotgun below your shoulder. When you yell "pull", you acquire the bird with your eyesight and track it. You bring the gun to your shoulder and cheek (almost simultaneously) as your eyes and torso follow the pigeon. With practice, the shotgun will be pointing exactly where you are looking when it reaches your cheek and shoulder. As you track the pigeon, the gun is on target as you swing through and pull the trigger.
Depending upon the station, one's upper torso may be swinging from left to right or down to up or any combination in between. Once the gun is raised, it is always pressed firmly against the shoulder and the cheek is always in contact with the stock. Same principle applies (except I promise you that a human isn't traveling as fast as that clay pigeon.
)
Upvote
0
It's hard to describe. The rifle is still on my shoulder in a position where I'd be comfortable to fire it, yet I'm still moving it with my arms and keeping my eyes focused on the sights. I believe that type of motion is what is being modeled.
For what it's worth I can do this without moving my whole upper body, and I get a decent range of motion while still maintaining view on the aligned sights.
Think about it. Walk around with your weapon shouldered and aim as if you were ready to fire at different things as you go. (yes I know, safety, blah blah) You'll find that you don't move your body as if your arms are locked in position with your face glued to the stock.
For what it's worth I can do this without moving my whole upper body, and I get a decent range of motion while still maintaining view on the aligned sights.
Think about it. Walk around with your weapon shouldered and aim as if you were ready to fire at different things as you go. (yes I know, safety, blah blah) You'll find that you don't move your body as if your arms are locked in position with your face glued to the stock.
Last edited:
Upvote
0