• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Weapon Model Issues

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
#41
skully172;n2279306 said:
yeah the sights are looking odd, and the apperture is too big

P.S. The sight on the right isnt correctly aligned :p, it should be aligned on the top
Click to expand...

Actually as with the M16's peep sights, albeit to a much smaller degree, the AKs rear leaf sight aperture opens up when you look down the sights and focus on the front post - although again ofcourse to a much lesser degree than on the M16 because the rear sight isnt as close to your eyes as with a peep sight.

In short the opening in the AKs rear sight ingame I'm actually fine with. The scaling of the rear leaf sihght as a whole needs some attention though.

The magazine on the AK looks awful though..
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#42
Unus Offa said:
Actually as with the M16's peep sights, albeit to a much smaller degree, the AKs rear leaf sight aperture opens up when you look down the sights and focus on the front post - although again ofcourse to a much lesser degree than on the M16 because the rear sight isnt as close to your eyes as with a peep sight.

In short the opening in the AKs rear sight ingame I'm actually fine with. The scaling of the rear leaf sihght as a whole needs some attention though.

The magazine on the AK looks awful though..
Click to expand...

It doesn't open up that white, the rear sight is still taller, and the post is a thicker. of course it can't be entirely accurate because to make it useful in game you're going to need to realize that some principles of vision don't transfer over to video games, but it could at least be narrowed a bit.
 
Upvote 0
#43
Thank you for bringing these to our attention.

Now a bit of future warning (that you may not like). Many of these are unlikely to change, at least for launch (and perhaps post launch as well). All the teams are working on items critical to the release of the game and there is no time to go back and re-do these models in the schedule.
 
Upvote 0
#44
Yoshiro;n2288203 said:
Thank you for bringing these to our attention.

Now a bit of future warning (that you may not like). Many of these are unlikely to change, at least for launch (and perhaps post launch as well). All the teams are working on items critical to the release of the game and there is no time to go back and re-do these models in the schedule.
Click to expand...

I mean this was posted... 3 months ago
 
Upvote 0
#45
Yoshiro;n2288203 said:
Thank you for bringing these to our attention.

Now a bit of future warning (that you may not like). Many of these are unlikely to change, at least for launch (and perhaps post launch as well). All the teams are working on items critical to the release of the game and there is no time to go back and re-do these models in the schedule.
Click to expand...

Are you atleast going to fix the peep sights?
 
Upvote 0
#46
Unus Offa said:
Are you atleast going to fix the peep sights?
Click to expand...

I think he already answered your question... The only way "to fix" the iron sights would be an entirely new system for the iron-sights, or rather adding a new system to the iron-sights. Which means prototyping, testing, tuning, and I think the game is past this stage. Would be interesting to do from a modding perspective, though I bet it would also be a pain in the ass to implement (overriding all the weapons in game). Also would probably require a fair bit of experimentation, off the top of my head, there's 2-3 (probably more) ways to go about simulating the focus and blurring when in iron-sights.
 
Upvote 0
#48
Beskar Mando;n2288238 said:
I think he already answered your question... The only way "to fix" the iron sights would be an entirely new system for the iron-sights, or rather adding a new system to the iron-sights. Which means prototyping, testing, tuning, and I think the game is past this stage. Would be interesting to do from a modding perspective, though I bet it would also be a pain in the *** to implement (overriding all the weapons in game). Also would probably require a fair bit of experimentation, off the top of my head, there's 2-3 (probably more) ways to go about simulating the focus and blurring when in iron-sights.
Click to expand...

That's not what it took years back when TW released Rising Storm. The M1 Garand rear sight 3d model has an opening maybe 20x larger than in real life, so that the Marines can get an almost realistic sight picture.

The fix has already been done before, however they also need to use the sights from the correct rifle and time period for the M16A1
 
Upvote 0
#49
Lemonater47;n2288245 said:
Hopefully he means by "fix the sights" change the sights to the period correct sights. As someone pointed out in another thread they are actually post war sights.
Click to expand...

They can't bloody well put sights on the weapons that are only correctly modelled when not aiming now can they? If they do that all US weapons bar the M60 will become useless ingame as you'll be left with a completely unrealistic sight picture that you simply won't be able to see a thing with when aiming:

Good luck being effective with a sight picture as obstructive and totally unrealistic as this:
75eEsyZ.png



In short: Fix the way peep sights are modelled when aiming down sights first (perhaps with a peep ring widening & blurring animation), then applying the correct model sights will be easy peasy.

As for it taking a long time to do, I don't buy it. It's almost as simple an animation to do as the flipping between different sights as we already have.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#51
Lemonater47;n2288282 said:
Or they could simulate how eyes work better. I don't see why you want model adjustments while in different states when there are other options lol. It would just be really weird the sight literally changing size when aiming.
Click to expand...

Why would it be weird? Add in some blurr and most people will understand what its trying to simulate.

The only other option is the lazy one of ditching realistic looking peep rings outside aim view and only going for the realistic sight picture (as so many other games have done), as the opposite which is realistic looking peep rings from afar but an unrealistc sight picture is the only thing which would have a negative impact on gameplay.

In other words you can choose an option which preserves both the aesthetics and the realism or you can choose to dump one of the two, in which case gameplay should always rank higher than aesthetics.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#54
If we're making a thread about weapon improvements, I'd like for the DP to have the option to upgrade it to the belt-fed RP-48 gun, it was a post WW2 modification that could be simply attached to any DP style machine gun (Both Chinese and Russian, War and post war models.) that gave it the capacity to fire from a 100 round belt fed system!

It'd be great because then Vietnam will have a full belt fed 7.62mmR machine gun!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UE4_id4hDQ4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDYPLFLk6UY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_lCTW5VbJo
 
Upvote 0
#57
Unus Offa said:
They can't bloody well put sights on the weapons that are only correctly modelled when not aiming now can they? If they do that all US weapons bar the M60 will become useless ingame as you'll be left with a completely unrealistic sight picture that you simply won't be able to see a thing with when aiming:

Good luck being effective with a sight picture as obstructive and totally unrealistic as this:
75eEsyZ.png



In short: Fix the way peep sights are modelled when aiming down sights first (perhaps with a peep ring widening & blurring animation), then applying the correct model sights will be easy peasy.

As for it taking a long time to do, I don't buy it. It's almost as simple an animation to do as the flipping between different sights as we already have.
Click to expand...
Except you can't blur / widen things via an animation... It'd have to be done via materials or a post process effect most likely.
 
Upvote 0
#59
Beskar Mando;n2288381 said:
Would also like to mention the reference Unus keeps referencing is of the 400m sight picture, and not the normal one.
Which is a good reason to fully review things before complaining about them ;)
Below is 250m and the 400m sights respectively.
http://imgur.com/a/8avX5
Click to expand...

*sigh*

Please do keep up, I've been complaining about how both sights (all peep sights infact), wide & narrow, are modelled ingame since the beginning.

I posted a picture of the narrow ingame long range sight just now to demonstrate why the correct M16A1 sights (where there's no wide aperture) aren't possible to implement ingame right now as that would mean the same size aperture for close & long range, and as you could see such a small aperture is useless ingame - and that purely because eye focus, dof & lense distance isn't simulated.

M16A1 sights, notice there's no difference between the long range & short range aperture size:
MT03_M16_T5P5_v_zps5cf73c8a.jpg~original




However even with the correct aperture size as seen above, in real life the aperture opens up until the sides are very thin & semi transparent, providing a very good sight picture that is nowhere near as obstructive as we have ingame right now (even compared to the wide short range aperture ingame):

M16A1 sight picture from manual
fig102.jpg







THIS opening and thinning out of the aperture when looking down sights is what we need simulated if we are to ever have hope of correctly modelled peep sights, otherwise what we end up with is either grossly incorrect sight pictures or incorrectly modelled sights as seen from outside aim view.


Do you understand now?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu