What will we see from RO:HoS at GamesCom 2009?

[Fedorov]

it is as easy IRL to see when aiming, as when not aiming... and guess what? thats the way it currently is in RO! needs more to be said?

is not easy to see someone far away that you should be able to easily see, you press the steeady button because in that moment you are interested more in whats in front of you, if you need the peripheral vision because you are indoors or whatever, you dont need to steady your aim either at that range

 

[LemoN]

guys keep in mind that this will even higher the ammount of those "wow where the hell got that from" shots!

you just cant get enough of those moments ^^ (yes i really love dying in RO:Ost ^^)

 

[Mormegil]

it is as easy IRL to see when aiming, as when not aiming... and guess what? thats the way it currently is in RO! needs more to be said?

It's easy IRL to shoot someone at 100 meters... and guess what? that's NOT the way it currently is in RO! needs more to be said?

Like many things in life (or virtual life), it comes down to priorities. Do you prioritize immersion or realism of aiming / balistics?

You guys realize no amount of arguing back and forth is going to change the minds of TW. They tested this, and Ramm, a big proponent of NOT zooming was convinced. It's their game, not ours. They don't "owe it to us" to bow to our whims. If RO:HOS is as successful as TW hopes, it'll dwarf the current RO community, and we'll be a minority. But at least we'll have full servers.

 

[REZ]

It's easy IRL to shoot someone at 100 meters... and guess what? that's NOT the way it currently is in RO!

Actually, I find it pretty easy as it is.. so now it will be.. easier?

It's their game, not ours. They don't "owe it to us" to bow to our whims.

That's one of the worst arguments cause.. in the end it's my money. I'm the consumer. It's like saying it's no problem turn a blind eye to everyone who has supported them up to this point and trade them in for a whole new demographic just because it's larger. Doesnt really sit well.

 

[Fedorov]

Actually, I find it pretty easy as it is.. so now it will be.. easier?



That's one of the worst arguments cause.. in the end it's my money. I'm the consumer. It's like saying it's no problem turn a blind eye to everyone who has supported them up to this point and trade them in for a whole new demographic just because it's larger. Doesnt really sit well.

Is my money too, I support them, and I say FOV correction is necessary

 

[REZ]

I was just making a comment about his argument. We know you like artificial zoom Feddy. I consider you one of those who will buy their game no matter what they do to it.

 

[Fedorov]

I was just making a comment about his argument. We know you like artificial zoom Feddy. I consider you one of those who will buy their game no matter what they do to it.

I don't think I'd buy it if they added x-hairs and life bars, med-kits etc...

my defense of the points here may look like pure fanboyism, but is not, I honestly believe in them, and my posts talking about FOV correction BEFORE that video was released are proof

 

[Flogger23m]

if there is a building where the snipers hide and its at 100m of the chokepoint and he had to pixelhunt it cause it looks like 200m, now it'll look like 100m, and he wont wave to pixelhunt to kill those.

if they see you better cause they have a bigger monitor does not mean you have to pixelhunt for them, that would only happen for players at a very very long range, a type of encounter that will be less comon than in mid/long range urban fight

and if you have to pixelhunt that should be for a good reason and that reason being that the enemy is REALLY far away. pixelhunt for an enemy who is very close is stupid.

Your average person will still be pixel hunting at 300 or so meters.

300 meters is well within the effective range of the rifles in this game.

 

[Flogger23m]

isn't that totally unfair that the game handicaps me when im not aiming and holding my breath. is it realistic that people who hold their rifle against their head, can see more than those who arent?
adding the zoom is a half and half sollution, it fixes a problem on one side, and adds a problem on the other side. if you can't fix it, then leave it.

I agree. One of the problems in ArmA 1/2. I'll hear a shot go by, but I can't see the enemy. This can be a problem when you're running to a location and get caught with no cover (and there are always places/times this will happen). But when I go into iron sights and zoom, I can now spot them.

It will add an artificial problem where players will have to "stop and zoom" to spot an enemy.

While it fixes something, it still creates a huge problem.

is not easy to see someone far away that you should be able to easily see, you press the steeady button because in that moment you are interested more in whats in front of you, if you need the peripheral vision because you are indoors or whatever, you dont need to steady your aim either at that range

That is a really poor argument. You're focusing on the target, so they must become easier to see? Please, think of something better.

When I am at the range shooting, if I hold my breath and visually focus on a target, it does not become easier to spot.


As I said, I can understand iron sight zoom. It fixes a problem while creating a larger one.

But additional breathing zoom has no purpose as it does not fix any previously broken problem, and only adds an unrealistic feature. And this game is supposed to be realistic, at least for now.

I was just making a comment about his argument. We know you like artificial zoom Feddy. I consider you one of those who will buy their game no matter what they do to it.

I think I would agree.

 

[Lucan946]

I agree. One of the problems in ArmA 1/2. I'll hear a shot go by, but I can't see the enemy. This can be a problem when you're running to a location and get caught with no cover (and there are always places/times this will happen). But when I go into iron sights and zoom, I can now spot them.

It will add an artificial problem where players will have to "stop and zoom" to spot an enemy.

While it fixes something, it still creates a huge problem.





That is a really poor argument. You're focusing on the target, so they must become easier to see? Please, think of something better.

When I am at the range shooting, if I hold my breath and visually focus on a target, it does not become easier to spot.


As I said, I can understand iron sight zoom. It fixes a problem while creating a larger one.

But additional breathing zoom has no purpose as it does not fix any previously broken problem, and only adds an unrealistic feature. And this game is supposed to be realistic, at least for now.




I think I would agree.

No, it doesn't fix a problem while creating a larger one- it fixes a problem and creates an equally-sized one. I personally agree with the zoom because if I can shoot someone at 100 meters in real life using a Kar 98k with ease (which I, and most people, probably can do) then I should be able to do it in RO. On the same token, my eyes don't zoom in in real life, and therefore I am doing something that I could not do in real life. It's a trade off- something you can do for something you can't do. There is no way to realisticly model the human eye and how it reacts to everything in a game.

 

[-[SiN]-bswearer]

FOV and ironsights........who cares. it's called a hipshot figure it out

 

[Fedorov]

Your average person will still be pixel hunting at 300 or so meters.

300 meters is well within the effective range of the rifles in this game.

and why do you want him to look as if he was at 600m?

That is a really poor argument. You're focusing on the target, so they must become easier to see? Please, think of something better.

When I am at the range shooting, if I hold my breath and visually focus on a target, it does not become easier to spot.

Your argument is the poor one, of course it sould be easier to see, because you are not seeing as much as you could in RL, your normal vision in game is zoomed out just too much, making everything look twice as far but yeah, lets ignore that no matter how many times we say it

and WTF is that thing about creating a larger problem?? its a much lesser problem (if a problem at all)

 

[Mormegil]

I'm the consumer. It's like saying it's no problem turn a blind eye to everyone who has supported them up to this point and trade them in for a whole new demographic just because it's larger. Doesnt really sit well.

It may not sit well, but that's a compromise made when an "amateur" mod operation goes professional. They need to eat, pay mortgages, etc. If it costs 10 (or was it 30) times more to make RO:HOS than ROO (plenty of the material was already in RO:CA), then they need to increase their income. Either they sell 10 times more copies of the game, or they increase the price 10 fold.


I'm thinking back to when beta 3.0 came out, and people were complaining about how vehicles ruined the game, or smoke grenades would ruin the game, or leaning would ruin the game, or a second click to work the bolt would ruin the game...etc. We get use to it, and maybe even like it.

 

[PUTZ]

...or a second click to work the bolt would ruin the game...

where would be have been without that one? damn...

 

[SchutzeSepp]

It's easy IRL to shoot someone at 100 meters... and guess what? that's NOT the way it currently is in RO! needs more to be said?

thats' really an artificial problem that exists in theory, it does not manifest in a tangible way; what is the difference between shooting someone IRL who according to your brains calculation stands at 100m of you.
and between shooting someone ingame who according to your brains is standing at 100m of you aswell?

even if he in theory isn't that far, that's how he looks, and thats how far your brains say he is. do you need the zoom to fix a problem, your brain has already fixed for you?

the zoom isn't gonna change much, instead of now pixelhunting those who appear to be at 200m, you will be pixelhunting those who appear at 400m. you will likely just get shot twice as fast, twice as far as in RO, by people so far that they aren't even 1 pixel large when you aren't zooming.

TW can keep the zoom, as long as it can be toggled off server side. i understand the reasons behind it etc... but it appears many would just not have it anyway.

 

[Zennousha]

and why do you want him to look as if he was at 600m?



Your argument is the poor one, of course it sould be easier to see, because you are not seeing as much as you could in RL, your normal vision in game is zoomed out just too much, making everything look twice as far but yeah, lets ignore that no matter how many times we say it

and WTF is that thing about creating a larger problem?? its a much lesser problem (if a problem at all)

Except you're not seeing it properly (maybe your eyes need a zoom mode on the forum?). You're not seeing it as 600, you're seeing it as you PROPERLY would in real life at 300m. Right now in RO if you see something from 100m, it's not as visible as it should be. The zoom fixes that. It's not the most realistic approach, but the result is realistic.

 

[Fedorov]

the zoom isn't gonna change much, instead of now pixelhunting those who appear to be at 200m, you will be pixelhunting those who appear at 400m.

but ncounters at those ranges wont be that common, while in current ostfront are nonexistant

 

[babokitty]

It kinda sucks that TW is doing this, but I guess they must cater to the hordes of COD console noobs that every game company is trying to court these days.

But the fact still remains. The zoom creates an unrealistic situation and a BIG problem where a person is able to clearly see his opponent AND have a much easier time shooting him while the vice versa is not true.

From a gameplay mechanic perspective, the current system is flawed only in distance perception, but fair to both defender and attacker. With the zoom system, all the adv goes to the defender/camper.

If you think the gameplay is slow and frustrating now, you'll be having ragefits with cheap zoom kills. Say bye bye to infantry combat.

 

[SchutzeSepp]

well im probably overreacting, everybody is right and everybody is wrong also. it's a problem i would not like to see fixed this way. it can't be fixed entirely because the technology doesn't allow it yet. you would need warp around screens that measure where your eye is looking at etc, and accordingly adjusts the depth focus etc... untill that i don't like a half sollution that fixes the problem for some (those who are zoomed in) and leaves the problem for others (those who aren't zoomed in)
plus there are other factors that play a role IMO, ingame it is anyway more easy to spot someone than IRL. first off, after x time, everybody will know the maps by head and will know wich pixel shouldn't be there. RL is so much more complex, and you controll your real body much better than an ingame character. the limied view you have ingame sort of compensates that back.
seeing as good as you do IRL, in an environment that is much more simple than RL where your brains can identify a human-like character 100x faster than IRL (because after a while you know exactly how your generic enemy looks like, and how to tell him appart from the limited textures and decoration available ingame)
won't that be a worse compromise than the actual one?

 

[Das Bose]

Nope I don't think you're overreacting, I don't want them to 'half fix' a problem in this way either. Also I bet 90% of gamers don't even know the problem exists in the first place.

Edit: Fedorov is obviously in the remaining 10%.