Zoom

[TheRealGunther]

I know I am in the minority on this one but I have never been a fan of the zoom.Unless the gun has a scope its a player aid to make the game easier (arcade) feature.People always complain about pixel hunting well the truth be told in RL that's realistic.

I shoot my HP rifles at 400m in my backyard (ya I have a crap load of grass to mow). At 200 plus yards often the target im aiming at is smaller than my front sight post.At 400 yards I have to aim a tad above the target to compensate for bullet drop.Many times the front sight completely covers the target.Closing one eye (which I do not do) to reduce my FOV does not help to make the target any larger or easier to hit. (not like in game)

I always found the so called pixel hunting in Ost to be very realistic.It also separated a good shot from a average shot.In HoS it makes everyone a good shot the problem is its a very popular feature.I never expect it to be removed its a case of giving the majority what they enjoy.Even tho im not a fan of this feature I understand why it will remain.

All of this is just my opinion of course and I rarely even use it as I feel it makes me a better shot not using the aid.My point being pixel hunting is very realistic their is no magic zoom on iron sights.Trying to hit very tiny targets at a distance is part of the challenge of iron sights .... for me anyway.

 

[TraXx]

I know I am in the minority on this one but I have never been a fan of the zoom.Unless the gun has a scope its a player aid to make the game easier (arcade) feature.People always complain about pixel hunting well the truth be told in RL that's realistic.

I shoot my HP rifles at 400m in my backyard (ya I have a crap load of grass to mow). At 200 plus yards often the target im aiming at is smaller than my front sight post.At 400 yards I have to aim a tad above the target to compensate for bullet drop.Many times the front sight completely covers the target.Closing one eye (which I do not do) to reduce my FOV does not help to make the target any larger or easier to hit. (not like in game)

I always found the so called pixel hunting in Ost to be very realistic.It also separated a good shot from a average shot.In HoS it makes everyone a good shot the problem is its a very popular feature.I never expect it to be removed its a case of giving the majority what they enjoy.Even tho im not a fan of this feature I understand why it will remain.

All of this is just my opinion of course and I rarely even use it as I feel it makes me a better shot not using the aid.My point being pixel hunting is very realistic their is no magic zoom on iron sights.Trying to hit very tiny targets at a distance is part of the challenge of iron sights .... for me anyway.

well said... +1

 

[ro_sauce]

once again, this can be disabled in a server's options, so start talking to server ops who will turn this off for your enjoyment.

 

[TheRealGunther]

once again, this can be disabled in a server's options, so start talking to server ops who will turn this off for your enjoyment.

Indeed...Pretty much any gripe a person has can be adjusted in admin options.The problem is hardly anyone runs custom settings its a shame too many game play variations can be added.What hurts is we just don't have the player base for a good variety of servers running different settings.The handful of populated servers pretty much have to run stock realism settings or loose their players.I am really hoping RS will help RO2 just as DH helped Ost and maybe we can see more servers running custom settings.The player base will always rise and fall we just need some brave admins to try something different at those peak times.

/Support Custom servers

 

[PhoenixDragon]

Game play is more important than zoom in this game especially since the "realistic amout of zoom isn't even achieved".

As I've pointed out, zoom's primary result on gameplay is to simply extend ranges of vision and engagement (By a multiple somewhat less than the zoom multiplier). That's largely it. In my opinion, extending engagement ranges aids gameplay by increasing the ratio between accurate shooting range and movement speed.

I shoot my HP rifles at 400m in my backyard (ya I have a crap load of grass to mow). At 200 plus yards often the target im aiming at is smaller than my front sight post.At 400 yards I have to aim a tad above the target to compensate for bullet drop.Many times the front sight completely covers the target.

At 400m, I assume you're still able to make out what it is you're shooting at, which is a big improvement over RO2. The most you might be able to tell in-game is that it's a roughly human-shaped object. Right now, even with focus-zoom, it can be hard to tell which side someone is on at any notable range; Past 100m, you largely have to rely on running animation or making assumptions from their position in the map and which way they're shooting (Which is why you almost always get team-killed if you get around behind enemy positions, no matter how many times you tell your team that you're there). Even at just 50m it can be difficult to identify what side someone is on if they're in even partial cover. At that range in real-life, I can identify my friends by face.

And as a note, zoom doesn't change the ratio of iron-sight size to target size at all; if it's smaller than the front sight post without zoom, it'll be smaller than the front sight post with zoom.

A more proper way of modeling the difficulty of long-range shooting would be not in making us half-blind, but adding mild sight misalignment. Have the front and back sights waver slightly, with severity depending on the situation, and largely replacing the weapon sway we have now. It had several advantages. Most notably, the current sway system is 100% accurate (That is, up to the limits of the weapon) at the moment you pull the trigger. Wait until the front post crosses your target, click the button, send a bullet downrange with the same accuracy as if you were prone and braced. With sight misalignment, you'd have to pay more careful attention to both front and rear sights, rather than just waiting for the one to cross your target. This makes it much more effective as a limitation than simple weapon sway. It also works as a way to eliminate many other problems people have with the game; add a fairly small ~1 second duration sight misalignment that rapidly decreases in strength when you go to iron-sights (In addition to the weapon not being auto-centered when you do so), and the issue of long range quick snap-shots is largely eliminated, without impairing short-range (~10-25m) engagements significantly.

 

[Proud_God]

A more proper way of modeling the difficulty of long-range shooting would be not in making us half-blind, but adding mild sight misalignment. Have the front and back sights waver slightly, with severity depending on the situation, and largely replacing the weapon sway we have now. It had several advantages. Most notably, the current sway system is 100% accurate (That is, up to the limits of the weapon) at the moment you pull the trigger. Wait until the front post crosses your target, click the button, send a bullet downrange with the same accuracy as if you were prone and braced. With sight misalignment, you'd have to pay more careful attention to both front and rear sights, rather than just waiting for the one to cross your target. This makes it much more effective as a limitation than simple weapon sway. It also works as a way to eliminate many other problems people have with the game; add a fairly small ~1 second duration sight misalignment that rapidly decreases in strength when you go to iron-sights (In addition to the weapon not being auto-centered when you do so), and the issue of long range quick snap-shots is largely eliminated, without impairing short-range (~10-25m) engagements significantly.

As you may know, I totally support all of the above, well said. I think people's opinion on zoom might change for the better once something like the above is added.

 

[PhoenixDragon]

As you may know, I totally support all of the above, well said. I think people's opinion on zoom might change for the better once something like the above is added.

It would certainly handle a lot of situations better than the current sway would. It gives an inaccuracy that is still visibly represented and can, to a degree, be counteracted, but introduces a degree of imprecision even to those corrections. Introducing that would effectively replace most of the situations that currently use sway, leaving it mainly for stuff like exhaustion, movement, or your arms tiring out; situations where you have serious impairment not only to your ability to aim the weapon steadily, but to keep it supported or aimed in the correct general direction.

 

[TheRealGunther]

At 400m, I assume you're still able to make out what it is you're shooting at, which is a big improvement over RO2. The most you might be able to tell in-game is that it's a roughly human-shaped object. Right now, even with focus-zoom, it can be hard to tell which side someone is on at any notable range; Past 100m, you largely have to rely on running animation or making assumptions from their position in the map and which way they're shooting (Which is why you almost always get team-killed if you get around behind enemy positions, no matter how many times you tell your team that you're there). Even at just 50m it can be difficult to identify what side someone is on if they're in even partial cover. At that range in real-life, I can identify my friends by face.

And as a note, zoom doesn't change the ratio of iron-sight size to target size at all; if it's smaller than the front sight post without zoom, it'll be smaller than the front sight post with zoom.

When I shoot my rifles at long range I get no magic button to give me a better sight picture.What you see is what you get closing one eye to reduce my FOV doesn't help.I know how the zoom works it reduces your FOV so you can see a smaller area better.

One thing this game doesn't have compared to RL is depth perception.Some how this throws things off and the focus really acts as a zoom. Here is an example .....http://imageshack.us/a/img708/8577/2012091400009.jpg Both shots was taken from the exact same spot as well.

If you look at the pic on the bottom everything looks bigger the sights the objects even the window im aiming at.Its a player aid no matter how you look at it.My point is in RL their are no such aids the sight picture stays the same no matter what you do.

Example of RL sights on distant targets notice the sight pretty much completely covers the target.http://imageshack.us/a/img825/4136/glarefilter02.jpg .Closing one eye does not bring it into focus any better.In fact the Marines trained us to keep both eyes open to be able to have more situational awareness. Tunnel vision is something a soldier does not want in combat.

I only wish I had this aid in RL it would make hitting targets at range MUCH easier.I am not even arguing against the zoom its a VERY popular player aid and removing it would just hurt the game (I don't want that). Even tho im not a fan of this feature I have accepted it for the good of the game I am just saying its anything but realistic.

 

[PhoenixDragon]

When I shoot my rifles at long range I get no magic button to give me a better sight picture.

That's right, and you don't even need it. Your view in real-life is already significantly better than we get in-game. Zoom is an attempt to give a similar level of detail that we get with our bare eyes, through the inferior resolution of a PC monitor. It's a necessary adaptation if we want realistic visual and engagement ranges.

The FoV in-game is a compromise. At the widest, it's much narrower than the human eye (70-90 degrees, depending on monitor, as opposed to ~170-180 for the unaided human). At its narrowest, it provides less visual clarity than the human eye (It becomes difficult to even see an exposed human in-game at not even half the range that they should be visible in real-life; 20/20 vision is the ability to distinguish details separated by only 1 MoA, or effectively ~4" at 400m).

One thing this game doesn't have compared to RL is depth perception.Some how this throws things off and the focus really acts as a zoom. Here is an example .....http://imageshack.us/a/img708/8577/2012091400009.jpg Both shots was taken from the exact same spot as well.

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here. The picture you showed doesn't have anything to do with depth perception, it's just zoom.

I only wish I had this aid in RL it would make hitting targets at range MUCH easier.

You can already see much better than we can in-game, even with zoom, so no, not really. Try finding a place you can even make a 400m shot in RO2, and compare the difference in what you can see in the real-world and in-game. Better yet, I'll do half the work for you. Consider how much you can see at 400m. Then look at these in-game pictures, all taken from the same spot, with an enemy soldier standing in the open without any cover.

Here's unzoomed. Can you see the enemy soldier? He's there. It's just that he's only 1 pixel wide and 3 pixels tall. With 20/20 vision being about 1MoA acuity, that means the RO2 soldier is well past legally blind (Which starts at just 20/200).

Here's with focus zoom. You might be able to see him now. He's now 7 pixels tall, and roughly 2-3 wide. Not legally blind any more, but it's way up there.

Here's a scoped view, with focus zoom. You should be able to see him now. At this level of zoom you can even tell (Due to the sharp contrast of colors) that he has a distinct head. You can probably even tell just a little about his stance. Now we're starting to get close to what the unaided human eye can see at 400m. It just took a 3.5x scope with focus-zoom to get there.

 

[TheRealGunther]

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here. The picture you showed doesn't have anything to do with depth perception, it's just zoom.

That's my whole point it is a "zoom" and it does make things bigger in RL this cannot happen. Its an arcade feature made to make the game easier its as simple as that.That's my gripe with it as well the human eye cannot zoom in any way.Is it realistic (no) does it make the game easier (yes). It just seems much more realistic without the zoom for me the game already has too many player aids.

Also in game one thing that hurts long distant shooting is the fog that covers the battlefield (on most maps).As well as the shader AA that makes everything a bit blurry turn off AA in game and things are much clearer.IMO regular Fsaa is much better than shader AA as it does not give the blur effect. Even the in game ultra AA has some blur compared to regular AA or none at all.

For me Ost has the most realistic gun play of any game even with the pixel hunting.HoS comes close but aids like the zoom is just not realistic even tho people love it because it makes it easier to kill.Like i said I have accepted it taking it away would only hurt the player numbers.

I'm just saying the human eye cannot do that I find it much easier to hit a target at 200m in game than in RL.Just today I got a 300m kill on the bridges map.Sure I couldn't make out much detail but I could clearly see him and with the zoom I could tell he was aiming at me.

The RL photo I gave is very much a pixel hunt the whole target is 3 1/2 foot wide.The bulls eye in the center is just a tiny spec (8 inches wide)and in many cases the front sight covers the intended target.If I could zoom like in game it would make hitting it much easier. I'm not arguing for or against it i'm simply saying its not very realistic being able to zoom with iron sights.

Take away the fog and the AA blur and objects would be much easier to see in game ... even without the zoom.

 

[Proud_God]

I'm just saying the human eye cannot do that I find it much easier to hit a target at 200m in game than in RL.Just today I got a 300m kill on the bridges map.

Imo (and as stated above) rock-steady iron sights play a much bigger part than zoom in how easy it is to hit people.

 

[Cwivey]

Best way to describe the human eye is that fisheye lense effect, with the clear, big stuff in the middle, and things getting smaller and blury towards the edges. Zoom represents that bit in the middle, and being un-zoomed gives the rest of the perhipheral vision (No even close in terms of degrees).

I can't think why a combat simulation such as ArmA2 or a flight-sim like IL2 would include such an "Arcade" feature...TheRealGunther, just say you don't like it rather th'n trying to plaster such a word on the zoom.

 

[>< f4ct0r...13]

Zoom is a way to put poor players (AKA twitch shooters) on par with good players (those who use as much of the game's inputs as they can, and find a way to mesh those inputs with their mates).

Adding zoom to a shooter game is a sad indictment of the player community. They need computer aids to feel good about playing.

As sad as it is to see RO:OST creators catering to the lowest common denominator of player, one must admit...they were right.

 

[ro_sauce]

no its not.
thats just your opinion of it.
MAYBE they were trying to simulate focusing your view.

stop complaining and go play classic, or rent a server and set it up how YOU want, see how it performs.
if everyone likes your settings, then you were right, and you can keep your opinions applied to your own server.

stop trying to run everyone else's servers.

 

[TraXx]

Take away the fog and the AA blur and objects would be much easier to see in game ... even without the zoom.

like most fps pro-mods... +1

If the monitor displayed images are already so poor compared to what the human eye sees (which is absolutely true), then why degrade those images even further with additional blur and fog?

However, my opinion on most things nowadays concerning RO2 is... "whaaaaaaaatever, I'll play it how they have it set-up and that's all there is to it."

 

[TraXx]

rock-steady iron sights play a much bigger part than zoom in how easy it is to hit people.

YES.

Watch anyone who normally plays realism and doesn't play much classic go into a classic mode (with the sway differences) and even proven competitive players will tell you that they have to work much harder to hit certain shots, and some, are either not possible or they have to reset their sights, go to prone, or use some other implement to hit their target.

Now, I am VERY much a fan of the sprint-stop-pop-shot-kill (because I believe that only good shooters pull it off with any regularity), but I can tell you that it is a much more difficult shot when the sway is increased (stands to reason, right?)

IMO this dynamic (amount of sway) is one of the worst things that we lost from the many good things that ROOST had right.

I'm definitely one of those people who is for making aiming constructs more difficult in shooters -- it always separates those who can from those who just can't.

 

[r5cya]

like most fps pro-mods... +1

If the monitor displayed images are already so poor compared to what the human eye sees (which is absolutely true), then why degrade those images even further with additional blur and fog?

However, my opinion on most things nowadays concerning RO2 is... "whaaaaaaaatever, I'll play it how they have it set-up and that's all there is to it."

i'd sure like to try a map without any blur or fog and no zoom. i think ogledow might come closest to that.
i'm with you on playing however it's set up. i'd love it if there was just one "mode" and we weren't split at all. even then we'd still be dealing with server setting splitting us.

YES.

Watch anyone who normally plays realism and doesn't play much classic go into a classic mode (with the sway differences) and even proven competitive players will tell you that they have to work much harder to hit certain shots

Now, I am VERY much a fan of the sprint-stop-pop-shot-kill (because I believe that only good shooters pull it off with any regularity), but I can tell you that it is a much more difficult shot when the sway is increased (stands to reason, right?)

you proved that to me last night. you sure can pull off a quick shot!

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

Best way to describe the human eye is that fisheye lense effect, with the clear, big stuff in the middle, and things getting smaller and blury towards the edges. Zoom represents that bit in the middle, and being un-zoomed gives the rest of the perhipheral vision (No even close in terms of degrees).

I can't think why a combat simulation such as ArmA2 or a flight-sim like IL2 would include such an "Arcade" feature...TheRealGunther, just say you don't like it rather th'n trying to plaster such a word on the zoom.

I would respect someone's opinion more if they just said they didn't like it instead of going on and on...

 

[TheRealGunther]

TheRealGunther, just say you don't like it rather th'n trying to plaster such a word on the zoom.

That's the first thing I stated in this thread "Im not a fan of zoom"

Also Arma is not the shining beacon of realism people think while its a epic! sim (about the only one) many gun handling features are far from realistic.
Zoom,random jumpy sway,reduced damage (few one shot kills) third person view etc. Again its a great game but too many people use it as a measure of realism.Go shoot some real guns then compare realism no game is truly realistic.

The combination of fog ,blur,small scaled avatars (Ost players was bigger). Makes me understand why people feel they need the zoom. Its really NP for me i just don't use it much at all its an easy fix.I am glad people enjoy the zoom its good for the game as far as player numbers.Just pointing out its not very realistic.

I knew I was in the minority here and would be kicking a bee's nest lol

btw I run 80 FOV Ost was like 70 so im used to it i guess with a lower FoV you don't need the zoom as much.For me 90 FOV which is sweet makes for tiny targets.

 

[PhoenixDragon]

Take away the fog and the AA blur and objects would be much easier to see in game ... even without the zoom.

The three images I linked were with AA disabled, and on the map with (By far) the lowest fog in the game, enough to only slightly discolor the target. There are no blurring effects. It was also, coincidentally, the only stock map where we can get a 400m line of sight, and only by having both people go well back from their respective spawns.

Now, I've pointed out how the numbers we get on the computer are inferior to the human eye (90x50 degree FoV with 6MoA resolution for a 1920x1080 monitor, even before any blurring or AA effects - which could actually help, as you won't drop an object for being sub-pixel - versus ~170x120 degree, 1MoA resolution for the average 20/20 human eye). I've posted several pictures demonstrating the view and size of a standing human at 400m in-game, where unzoomed a person is just a single pixel wide, while in real-life you can still make out details such as stance and facing. You have replied in generalities, while not addressing any of these facts. I'd like to hear your comparison between those pictures and what you can actually see at 400m.

(A slight correction; I did the math wrong in the previous post. The actual unzoomed visual acuity is about 20/120. Not quite legally blind, but still pretty horrible.)

So again, if you're going to assert that the feature is unrealistic, could you address these issues? They're very clear examples of how an unzoomed view in RO2, even without AA or fog, is inferior to the human eye.

Let me put the math even more clearly into perspective. To give the same FoV that we get now, but at the level of detail the human eye can resolve, you would need a grid of 36 1920x1080 monitors stacked 6x6. Even then, that still covers only about fifth of a human's full FoV, cutting off all peripheral vision.

Also:

small scaled avatars (Ost players was bigger).

Where do people keep getting this from?

Zoom is a way to put poor players (AKA twitch shooters) on par with good players (those who use as much of the game's inputs as they can, and find a way to mesh those inputs with their mates).

You like to make inflammatory accusations like this, while avoiding any discussion of actual numbers and facts. Care to address the numbers I posted, or the clearly-inferior view demonstrated in the images I posted? In real-life, I can spot an exposed and standing person at 900m+. I can make out several notable details at 400m. Can you even find the enemy soldier in the un-zoomed, 400m picture?

Nevermind that it still ignores that giving everyone zoom increases engagement ranges for everyone, which can potentially significantly increases the amount of areas that can threaten you, and by an amount far greater than than your zoom increases.