• 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

Beskar Mando;n2288606 said:
I did specifically specify post process. And I never said anything along the lines of doing a total modification to depth of field. Show me where I said the word "global" or heavily implied it.

It's what Lemon has been repeating the whole time, i.e. "make the eyes work like real eyes", however unbeknownst to him that means changing the whole way things are rendered ingame. Lemon somehow mistakenly believes it can all simply be solved by camera focus, as if the game was some sort of video camera recording and we just have to adjust the lens. It's hard to argue with someone who believes this. Now that you subsequently back him up and call such a venture an easier & less time consuming solution for the devs to undertake than a simple animation tells me you're not savvy with computer graphics.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
I don't know if you know but both Beskar and I actually mod this game lol. Hell Beskar has more hours in the SDK than than in the game. That doesn't even account for the time spent coding it either.

I didn't want to say that before for fear of sounding like an elitist prick. But now I have to.

And again you misunderstand entirely what I say. Do I want to stoop to your level and say that you have reading comprehension issues?
 
Upvote 0
Lemonater47;n2288611 said:
I don't know if you know but both Beskar and I actually mod this game lol. Hell Beskar has more hours in the SDK than than in the game. That doesn't even account for the time spent coding it either.

I didn't want to say that before for fear of sounding like an elitist prick. But now I have to.

And again you misunderstand entirely what I say. Do I want to stoop to your level and say that you have reading comprehension issues?

Modding covers a lot of things, most of it is extremely basic stuff nowhere near approaching the level of complexity attached to changing how the 3D picture is rendered, so you'll have to be a lot more specific if that's supposed to count for anything at all.

But ofcourse you could demonstrate with your modding skills how your solution can be applied using RO2 as your guinea pig. if it's easier than a simple animation with dof/blur effects then it should be smooth riding for you.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Atleast we are a step further I guess.

I honestly can't understand either how changing and animating the diameter of a circle would be harder than a complex DOF engine. Heck, I do this all day in my job even though it's not videogame modding. I use 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and Maya nearly every day. But this is not a competition.

The only tricky thing would be the blur effect around the inner circle. Atleast, if you want to make it look realistic.
 
Upvote 0
Yoshiro has confirmed that they are looking into the issue with the sights, however what method they will use to solve it (if at all) is up for grabs. The simplest solution however is an animation effect, and definitely not some complex global lens effect.

Hopefully they get around fixing the issue before release however so that we can have realistic & useful peep sight pictures coupled with correctly modelled sights. God knows the M14 & M16 need it.
 
Upvote 0
Mises;n2288733 said:
Wouldn't blurring the peep sight in post-processing be possible? I've seen it in some games, and I'm talking about 3D models, not 2D sprites like in America's Army. The blur wasn't very strong, but it always can be cranked up.

There is a solid reason AA and like old school operation Flashpoint did things the way they did. Using basically 2 triangles with opacity stuff like that is cheap on poly's for the cost of 1 transparent texture. And it makes a legit sight picture (more or less) Although now days, ya whatever. But you can't have seamless transitions from weapon at "the low ready" up to sight view. Coupled with clipping wackoness of playing with camera's and field of view. Its always compromises. If you dump the seamless transition of weapon you can get pretty legit sight picture going. But now you have some kind of strange swap of model assets and other issues most likely. Like some computers might what to spaz out for a second trying to load between things. thinking a totally fragged up hard drive. A post process effect probably could make a legit blur going, but might have other issues like now everything blurry outside of sight view (bad). Or the most likely issue. It would look funky as heck. Blurry rear sight but everything else not. So probably not a compromise anyone would want to make. But this last one works great for scopes, but not for this deal with sights that "wobble".

Back to AA. Since the Army was paying the bill and trying to slyly pop in a few basic Army level 10 soldier tasks, they are much more likely to go with as legit a sight picture as they can over other aesthetic considerations. Also bunch a of gun slingers are going to scream its all wrong.

I say just get the camera as close in as possible to peep sights. Screw trying to show off the weapon model so much in sight view. Just get camera angle as close as you can get without visible clipping and then make the peep diameter as close as you can get to an actual sight picture where the human eye is like 1 inch or less from that peep sight. And it sure looks like that is more or less what is going on. Although on the M16 the eye looks and feels like your eye is like 3 inches back. That would be bad with a peep sight. If your eye lashes aren't touching the thing, your probably doing it wrong. Although this takes up a bucket load of screen space. Your peripheral vision will be compromised but sight picture would feel better with a greater field of view when using a peep. Personally I think it worth it when I think about the M14 and M3 sights. UGH. Probably to late for that. So we are back to make the peeps bigger like how they have the M16. Basically a ghost ring sight. Looks right for a shotgun but it works for game play reasons. But I am not going to say its legit. Just the best compromise for what they are trying to do.
 
Upvote 0
This seems like a good place to throw in my weaponmodel problems with the Greasegun.

The modelname suggests a M3A1, but you used a M3 model instead.
I've made a short video showing the difference:

[video=youtube;abLC-j0QTBM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abLC-j0QTBM[/video]

For those who do not want to watch the video, I will explain the error:

There were 2 main variant of the Grease Gun in usage, the M3 and the M3A1
The main difference between those 2 is the ejection port size.
The A1 variant has a longer one, because it doesn't have any cockinglever unlike the M3 (the famous crank-lever on the right side of the gun), so it was designed to be cocked by your indexfinger.

RRXIII modelled both variants in 3D (which are EXCELLENT replicas of the real thing by the way) and you can clearly see the differences:

First, the M3
m3_grease_gun_submachinegun_by_redroguexiii-d7u7zaf.jpg





Second, the M3A1
m3a1_grease_gun_submachinegun_by_redroguexiii-d7twgfh.jpg





The M3 Grease Gun has to be reloaded by using the lever on the right side to cock the bolt back:


As a side note, the M3 has no mag-release button fence, compared to the A1, as seen on the renders by RRXIII.

The A1 has a much larger ejection port AND a cutout in the bolt for your finger to cock it:


I hope this clarifies the model mixup.


Greetings
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: exhausted
Upvote 0
Too bad this was never fixed and the M16's sights are still way too obstructive compared with looking through the real thing.

Other weapons got special treatment and had their apertures greatly enlarged (*cough* L1A1 *cough*), but not the M16. A big shame considering the M16 was the most common & best small arm of the US in Vietnam, however ingame it isn't even the 2nd most used weapon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Patu.Kuovi
Upvote 0
Unus Offa said:
Too bad this was never fixed and the M16's sights are still way too obstructive compared with looking through the real thing.

Other weapons got special treatment and had their apertures greatly enlarged (*cough* L1A1 *cough*), but not the M16. A big shame considering the M16 was the most common & best small arm of the US in Vietnam, however ingame it isn't even the 2nd most used weapon.

The M16 is objectively the best weapon in the game wym
 
Upvote 0