Suggestion to remove zoom altogether

[MSol_18]

I think that this should be considered because shooting at distances of 100m+ at people under cover is way too easy - much easier than it is in real life and any soldier in WWII would say that it's almost impossible.

Another point I would like to make is that the distances do not feel natural with 1.0 zoom on the gunsights...100m looks more like 30-40m. The whole idea is arcadish. I attached a few images to demonstrate this.

 

[Filo90]

i remember someone said that the zoomed view should be the real sight in life.....

 

[LogisticEarth]

I attached a few images to demonstrate this.

This has been hashed and rehashed again. It is not arcadey for one simple reason: The human eye has a far greater resolution than is available on any computer screen. In order to simulate this, you can zoom in, thus increasing the screen resolution for a small portion of your soldier's vision, as if you were focusing on it. This is all it is, it is not an arcadey addition to appeal to newbies.

It's actually a case where RO 2 is MORE realistic.

 

[MSol_18]

i remember someone said that the zoomed view should be the real sight in life.....

IMO it can't be... I have experienced shooting rifles at ranges and nothing zooms in like that...maybe they should add a minimal zoom like 0.3 or 0.4...1.0 is overdone, you can test it and you'll find that with 0.3 zoom the apartments map is bigger than you think...with 1.0 zoom shooting from east bridge to west bridge which are approx 80 m apart the distance seems very short...

 

[MSol_18]

My point is that its too easy to hit targets at ranges of 100m+ and its caused by the zoom therefore it should be removed...I tested the game on 0.1 zoom and its more realistic because its easy to hit at 50 m but 100m+ it gets quite hard but not impossible as long as the target isn't moving.

In addition, in all the years of my experience with weapons I have never experienced a magical zoom whilst aiming down my iron sights...the target gets sharper as the eye focus shifts from the iron sights to the target itself but the target is not magnified.

 

[Cairo1]

i respectfully dissagree. i believe also there should be no soom at all. otherwise we would have to assume all people in war have 20/20 vision. having bad vision still looks worse then some small thing you might no be able to see becuse you did not zoom in a bit. zooming would also negate the value of sharpshooter scopes like the ZF41 whick is only 1.5x zoom now if we are dooing 1.05x zoom for a rifle or something yah i have herd worse ideas. but is this something we need, espicaly when it takes away from the realisticness that so many of the old hardcore players love?

 

[Peter.Steele]

shooting at distances of 100m+ at people under cover is way too easy - much easier than it is in real life

Spent lots of time on the two-way range, have you?

 

[babokitty]

The zoom doesn't even address the problem it's purported to fix properly. Even if you make the zoomed FOV the same as typical monitor angles (about 35 degrees) the scale is not right depending on monitor sizes.

I don't understand why you can't just say what looks like 400m onscreen is 400m ingame and be done with it.

 

[barakas]

I think that this should be considered because shooting at distances of 100m+ at people under cover is way too easy - much easier than it is in real life and any soldier in WWII would say that it's almost impossible.

Another point I would like to make is that the distances do not feel natural with 1.0 zoom on the gunsights...100m looks more like 30-40m. The whole idea is arcadish. I attached a few images to demonstrate this.

You do realize that the distance in your screenshot is about 30m right?

Even zoomed in the guys head is only about 5-10 pixels wide. At around 100 meters, without zoom, a guys head is only a few pixels in total. Its completely unrealistic to try and hit targets at range in RO1 without zoom.

The zoom doesn't even address the problem it's purported to fix properly. Even if you make the zoomed FOV the same as typical monitor angles (about 35 degrees) the scale is not right depending on monitor sizes.

I don't understand why you can't just say what looks like 400m onscreen is 400m ingame and be done with it.

Because then SMGs would dominate the entire game, or be highly nerfed (like they were in RO1 where it was near impossible to hit anything with the PPSH past 10 meters).

 

[TheCygnusXI]

I must say I agree with everyone else - the zoom is a great feature. I mean, not to be an ***, but haven't the devs explained this issue like a million times? Why are people still *****ing? The zooming was made very clearly to account for the unrealistic way in which our monitors display things at a distance - yet the only people moaning are the ones who insist on the game needing to be as realistic as possible. Cut the devs a break, they are absolutely right about this feature.

 

[Lucan946]

I think that this should be considered because shooting at distances of 100m+ at people under cover is way too easy - much easier than it is in real life and any soldier in WWII would say that it's almost impossible.

Another point I would like to make is that the distances do not feel natural with 1.0 zoom on the gunsights...100m looks more like 30-40m. The whole idea is arcadish. I attached a few images to demonstrate this.

Just a question: how do you know how hard it is to shoot someone partially in cover? I'm not trying to be sarcastic. I'm genuinely curious. Read something somewhere? Because I'm fairly sure there were plenty of infantry engagements that occurred at well over 100m that didn't involve both sides just sorta sitting in the open, but which still incurred plenty of casualties.

Anyways, the zoom is there to represent the fact that a computer monitor can never mimic the capabilities of the human eye, so there's zoom to help the player out.

 

[Morello]

This has already been discussed at length in other threads. Zoom is here to stay.