Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Interesting video but what he showed wasn't done all that well. As he mentioned, and as it has already been mentioned a million times, certain things can't be recreated in a video game. The existing meshes and techniques used for weapon sights are completely fine, there's no reason to reinvent that wheel and take a huge risk in doing so for many reasons.

Main reason I'm going to point out is - gameplay balance.

Personally, I found the EOTech models when aiming in certain games "too large" and I didn't feel comfortable using them. There is literally /NO/ problem with this, you use sights like the EOTech and Aimpont as a personal preference, it won't give you an edge over another player if you're not comfortable using it as much as an ACOG or an optic with a zoom for longer range engagements. Back in Battlefield 3 I loved using irons sights on weapons such as the M16A3/4 because they didn't provide as much obstruction as others but on the down side I had a harder time acquiring targets at a longer range since the sights were much thicker than, for example, the reticule in the EOTech.

 

If you take an EOTech and do what LevelCap did you create a huge loop in balancing the weapons. Using an EOTech would not only give you an edge over anyone using iron sights because of its easier ability to track / fire on targets but also because you can physically see through it due to the opacity. You're leaving everyone using iron sights and ACOG's (and other sights that aren't similar to the Aimpoint or EOTech) in the dust and making the EOTech (or any sight using this solution) and actual item with a huge advantage. Some of the other reasons include immersion, practicality and implementation.

 

TLDR; This isn't an issue, it's a matter of preference. Nobody is forcing you to use other sights that provide low to no image zoom, you choose whether you want it or not based on how you feel using it. If you change it you will have everyone hogging that specific sight.

 

And making an object transparent isn't more realistic, lol. It's still there where as in real life your eyes basically make it disappear. If that was the case the devs should leave the binoculars functioning as they already are! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not just render the left and right eye with 50% opacity each onto a single frame?

 

Edit: Performance may be affected, but each eye could alternate during rendering. That might look a little weird, someone would have to try it out beforehand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if there has to be a choice between the two, I think it would be wise to do the zooming and masking. I would much rather be looking through a high res scope with the outside blurred/blacked out, rather than  be looking through a low res scope which drops fps. In addition a high res scope will make full use of the weapon, whereas one with low res handicaps the user. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well is it possible to make digital zoom inside the scope. I don't mean rendering but zooming digitally like you would on an iPad zoom in a picture for example

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doing a second render for PIP scopes is apparently a no-go due to performance. Apart from just doing one zoomed render and blurring the screen (like most games do), the second option was to just magnify part of a single render in the scope, causing poor resolution.

I thought, what if, instead of we render a zoomed OUT image and magnify this (with poor res in the scope as a result), what if we render a single zoomed IN image, like in most games, but we make this zoomed OUT (de-magnified/made smaller) outside the scope? You get PIP scopes, you get good resolution in the scope, and you get good resolution outside too, without having to do a double render.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not too. experienced with PIP rendering but couldnt you use a camera view inside a scope? Kinda like splicing two different peoples point of views on a map one close up one far away and combine them in scope zoom? Maybe this is how PIP works I dont know, but it seems this would solve the PIP problem.

Seems like using a free view inside a scope view should be no problem but Im not sure.

Just an observation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have run through every single scenario. Unless something fundamentally changes, this is not happening at this scale. Simply too expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

does that mean it is just incredibly high resolution?   

Yes. Which, when I think about it, may still cost a lot of resource since your computer won't just easily switch to a higher resolution back and forth without massive framedrops. Besides, the resolution increase would be very high for extremely zoomed weapons.

 

Aren't you rendering 2 views if your displaying both a zoomed in and zoomed out?

No. There's only one render, that gets magnified/de-magnified in the scope.

 

Im not too. experienced with PIP rendering but couldnt you use a camera view inside a scope? Kinda like splicing two different peoples point of views on a map one close up one far away and combine them in scope zoom? Maybe this is how PIP works I dont know, but it seems this would solve the PIP problem.

This would require you to render two things at once, basically twice the cost in performance. Which means if you run the game at 60FPS, when you grab a PiP weapon rendered this way, you'd get massive frame drops.

 

We have run through every single scenario. Unless something fundamentally changes, this is not happening at this scale. Simply too expensive.

Well on second thought a single render with a very high resolution will be just as costly as a dual render pip, if not worse. Disregard my suggestion then, my bad! But on the bright side, not having pip never really bothered me that much :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Insurgency going to have scopes on AAS mode?? All the vids i see online are from the US team. Just like PR everyone wants to stack on US because of the weapons and scopes. Any info on this? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree ins in PR use to mostly derp around and not take things seriously due to poor gear. That said, if you're in a good squad, ins is just as teamwork based as blufor. Don't really know what could be done to encourage srs biz on the ins team so people don't just smurf around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Taliban don't really use any scoped weapons. If the Insurgents were to represent say, the modern Syrian-Iraqi rebels/paramilitaries, I would expect more modern weapons (especially Steyr Aug, those seem pretty common out there)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assymetry and teamplay is what sets PR apart from other shooters, let Squad continue this

This right here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't expect to see them outside of DMR and Sniper. Spotter kit might have it. BLUFOR whores can be dealt with by mods, but I haven't seen it nearly as much in the last couple of years except from some clans (who like doing it for heavier assets, not weapons). It looks like iron sights are much more effective in Squad as well. 

 

One other thing, I am hoping the Taliban will get access to weapons like the Lee Enfield so they can engage targets at a further range than most US infantry. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Insurgents won't really be featured in AAS mode as soon as we have more time to implement other game modes and other factions.

 

Don't worry about it, we just aren't there yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it depends on factions.  It would be nice to see some rebel groups have more scope availability, say if they were Syrian rebels. Most are poor, for sure.  But, they did pick up weapon caches and have been increasing their financing.  Or another example: Hamas/Hezbollah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the ISIS are taking pretty great gear from near country such as iraq

 

Actually ISIS is taking pretty good gear from the US.  When ISIS engages a unit we trained, that unit throws down their gear and vehicles and runs away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to hear confirmation on this Z-Trooper.

 

Also guys, I cannot stress enough how much map design can negate BLUFOR technological advantages. Go play a round of Ramiel AAS if you get a chance. I have yet to see US forces get much further than the first flag, let alone win the round. If the insurgent factions get deploy in a manner that allows them to set up before BLUFOR is barely out of main, each compound is going to be a dog fight. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×